


^ yr 



<^*J&^ 



^» 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 

rXITED STATES OF AMERICA. 







'^^'>r"^i'f.::^^''^^T:^^ u.^ 




WHAT ROME TEACHES 



/. 



BY M. F. CUSACK 

(the nun of kenmare) 




^ 



NEW YORK 

THE BAKER & TAYLOR CO. 

1891 




<,i 



-^o?, 



Copyright, 1891, by 
The Baker & Taylor Co. 



t!Ol!4TENTS. 



PAGE 

Introduction 5 

Chapter I.— Infallibility 25 

Chapter II.— The Political, Social and Moral Conse- 
quences of the Doctrine of Papal Infallibility. . . 48 

Chapter III. — The Roman Catholic Church Teaches 
that all Protestants Will be Damned, and that 
Protestants Have no Religion 62 

Chapter IV.— The Plan of Salvation as Taught by 

the Roman Catholic Church 75 

Chapter V.— The Plan of Salvation as Taught by 
the Roman Catholic Church (continued)— The 
Confessional 104 

Chapter VI.— Salvation Through Mary 131 

Chapter VII.— The Moral Effects of the Roman Cath- 
olic Plan of Salvation 150 

Chapter VIII.— The Sacrifice of the Mass— Celibacy 
of the Clergy — Purgatory and Masses for the 
Dead 161 

Chapter IX.— The Doctrine of Intention 196 

Chapter X.— What Rome Does 208 



iv CONTENTS. 

Chapter XI. — Rome's Interference in Political Mut- 

tors 221 

Chapter XII.— The Roman Catholic Church's Atti- 
tude in Rej^ard to tlu^ Marriajje Tie and the 
Temperance Question 245 

Chapter XIII.— The Roman Catholic Church on the 
Results of Her own System of Education. — Some 
Facts ahout Roman Catholic Control of the Lib- 
erty of the Press 2G0 

Chapter XIV.— The Duty of Christian People 273 

Appendix. — I. No Salvation Outside the Church of 
Rome. II. The Evil of Indulgences, III. Rom- 
an Catholic Opinion of Protestants. IV. The 
Church and the Bible 277 



INTRODUCTIOlSr. 



I HAVE often been asked where a book could be ob- 
tained which would give a clear and correct account of 
the doctrines taught by the Koman Catholic Church. 
It is very easy to make charges against that Church 
which are mere personalities, but wc need something 
better ; we need facts, and facts that cannot be disputed. 
The question is not what does some priest say, of whom 
we have asked a question as to the teaching of his 
Church, but what does his Church say in her authorized 
formularies. There is no Church which teaches so 
clearly and so positively as the Church of Rome ; and in 
fact Rome prides herself on this very point, and with 
reason. Hence there can be no difficulty whatsoever in 
knowing what the Church of Rome teaches, if we go to 
the right sources of information. 

Unfortunately for the cause of truth, misrepresent- 
ations have been made by ignorant, though well-inten- 
tioned persons, and unfortunately also, when Roman 
Catholics are asked about the religious teachings of 
their Church, they do not always reply by telling the 



8 INTR OD UCTION. 

plain triitli, for tlicy are well aware that the plain truth 
would shock and scandalize Protestants. This is es- 
pecially true when there is question of the practice 
of devotion to the Virgin Mary. Koman Catholics will 
toll you that they do not look to her as a mediator ; 
but we can prove from authorized books of the Church 
of Rome that they do look to her as a mediator, and 
pray to her as such. 

I may add that it would be well if in controversy, or, 
asT prefer to say, in conversation with Roman Catholics, 
Protestants would confine their statements to what is 
actually to be found in the authorized books of the 
Church. This is more important than might be sup- 
posed ; your case is seriously weakened if you make a 
charge which you cannot prove, and there is no neces- 
sity for such charges. There is quite enough unscript- 
ural teaching in the authorized formularies of Rome, 
without making charges which are open to dispute. 
I would add also, that it is necessary to present these 
matters from a Roman Catholic point of view, if you 
hope to benefit Romanists ; otherwise they will not un- 
derstand your point of view, or they will find some loop- 
hole of escape from your argument ; and though they 
may know that you are quite correct in your state- 
tnents, they will in some cases take advantage of your 
ignorance. 

The whole question is far too important to admit of 
anything but the most serious treatment. Rome is 
advancing in power in this country with giant strides. 
She has her organized camps, her well-drilled militia, 
both si)iritual and temporal. We must be ready to 
meet lier advances. How little is being done to pre- 
pare a future generation for the fast-coming time when 



INTRODUCTION. 7 

Rome will control tlie country politically ! It will then 
be only the affair of a brief moment to establish the 
Inquisition, and to put your children in prison if they 
demand an open Bible. See what is done to-day in 
Mexico, where Francis Penzotti has been thrown for six 
months into a horrible and loathsome dungeon for no 
other reason than because he circulated the Scriptures. 
Rome does not do this to you now, because she is not 
yet strong enough ; but you can judge what she will 
do in America when she has power, by what she is 
doing at the present time elsewhere. You have been 
warned in time. God will surely hold you accountable 
if you do not give heed to the warning! 

There is another matter also which should be con- 
sidered. While Rome denounces every effort on the 
part of Protestants to enlighten each other as to the 
true teaching of the Church of Rome, and declares 
that it is ^' uncharitable" to speak of such things she 
does not think it uncharitable to teach that every 
Protestant will be eternally lost. She teaches this 
doctrine, as I will show presently, as an infallible truth, 
which none may dare to deny ; if they deny it, they do 
so at the peril of their own salvation. Who then is 
uncharitable ? Rome, who sends all Protestants to eter- 
nal flames, or Christians, who warn all whom they can 
that this is not the teaching of Christ ? 

Every day in the year, in this free country, Rome 
teaches the youth of her Church that every Protestant 
13 doomed to eternal death when he departs this life. 
She denounces the religion of all Protestant Churches 
carefully and repeatedly in her catechisms, and turns 
it into ridicule in every way possible. Now is it not time 
to hear the other side ? Is it not time for Protestants 



H INTRODUCTION. 

to learn a little of what Roino teaches ; and while liomo 
is teaching her children to avoid and abhor the Prot- 
estant religion, should not Protcstiints be tauglit to 
bi'warc of Rome ? No doubt if Protestants denounced 
Pome as systematically as Pome denounce? Protestant*, 
llu'ie would be a mighty outcry, and we would hear 
endless complaints of the '* uncharitabluness " of Prot- 
estants. 

Every Roman Catholic bishop takes an oath at liis 
consecration, which binds him to persecute Protcstiints. 
(See infra,, p. 59.) If any minister took a similar oath 
to persecute Romanists, what an outcry there would be ! 

The reader will see that I have been very careful in 
this work to give authority which cannot be disputed. 
There is no point on which Rom 3 insists more strongly 
than on her right to educate the young. She is wise. 
When the mind of the young has been carefully filled 
with the doctrines of Rome, and taught, as only Rome 
can teach, that it is a deadly sin to reason or think, 
then the work is accomplished. It is a very miracle of 
grace if a Roman Catholic in latei years ever leaves 
the Church, so terrible are the fetters in which he is 
bound ; and alas I Protestants are every day helping 
to bind these fette.s closer, instead of helping to break 
the bonds asunder I 

At the earliest dawn of reason the Roman Church 
begins her distinctive teaching. The first prayer the 
little child is taught is the '^Ilail Mary ; '* the first 
image it looks upon is the image of Mary ; it is taught 
to trust in Mary, to look to Mary, and to believe in 
Mary, before it can realize that there is a God. Prot- 
cstiints seldom estimate the immense power of early 
religious teaching. Rome knows it but too well 



INTRODUCTION, 9 

Would to God that every Protestant child was as well 
taught from the dawn of infancy to love God as every 
Catholic child is to love Mary ! So strong is the power 
of early impression, that it is almost impossible for the 
Roman Catholic to realize that there is even the least 
harm in devotion to Mary ; on the contrary, he is con- 
vinced from early instruction, that his only safety for 
eternity lies in his devotion to her. Remember that all 
his earliest predispositions and prejudices are in favor 
of trusting his salvation to Mary. All this I will 
presently prove from the authoritative statements of the 
Roman Catholic Church. 

I now proceed to show from what sources I prove 
what I have said, or will yet say ; and as my object 
is to compress as much as possible in a short space, 
I will be as brief as the nature of the subject will 
allow. 

The first religious instruction which the Roman 
Catholic child receives is from pictures, and the next 
from the catechism. The object to be gained by pict- 
ures is very important ; the mind of the child is im- 
pressed through his seeing, before he can understand 
fully what he hears. I do not say that the image of 
Mary is the only devotional object shown to the child, 
but most assuredly it is the principal one. Of course 
the Catholic would justify this by saying that the 
mother and child cannot be separated, for the child is 
shown as a helpless infant, taken care of and dependent 
on his mother. 

Thus the young are impressed from the first with the 
superior power of the mother ; thus they are prepared 
later to say the indulgenced and therefore infallible 
prayer, '^ Sweet heart of Mary, be my salvation.'^ 



10 INTRODUCTION. 

The child must jvsk the mother of the Saviour to in- 
tercede with lier hcl loss offspring , so the habit of 
looking first to Mary is formed, and her power im- 
pressed on tlie mind from infancy. 

No time is lost in teaehing the catechism. The cate- 
chism first tauglit is called a *' Catechism of Cliristian 
Doctrine." It was published by order of the Third 
Plenary Council of Baltimore, was authorized by the 
late Cardinal M.Closkey of Xew York, and was approved 
by Cardinal Gibbons, April G, 1885, as Apostolic Del- 
egate. This makes the catecliism the authoritative 
explanation of l^ic doctrine of the Roman Catholic 
Church, and no one dare dispute what it teaches It 
is published by Sadlicr cv: Co., the Roman Catholic 
publishers of Xew York. 

This catechism is the first whicli is tiiught to the 
children in parocliial schools. Before I proceed to the 
next book of authorized instruction, there is an im- 
portiint remark to be made. It will have been ob- 
served that this catechism is called a '' Catechism of 
Christian Doctrine." The tit^e is noteworthy for 
more than one reason. It is absolutely misleading to 
Protestants, and I fear it is intended to be such. It is 
not long since a Methodist minister had a dispute with 
a Roman Catholic priest on the teaching of the Church 
of Rome. The priest retorted that all his Church de- 
sired was to teach ** Christian Doctrine.'' The minister 
was delighted, and so expressed himself ; but the min- 
ister's idea of Christian Doctrine and the idea of the 
priest were jis far asunder as heaven and earth. Thus 
it is that Protestant honesty is no matcli for Roman 
Catholic duplicity, and hence it is absolutely necessary 
for Protestants to study for themselves what Rome 



INTRODUCTION. 11 

teaches, so that they may not be deceived either in- 
tentionally or unintentionally. 

In this very catechism of so-called ^' Christian Doc- 
trine/' children are taught to trust in the '^super- 
abundant satisfactions of the Virgin Mary and the 
Saints'' (page 40). But the minister in question 
did not know this ; the priest relied on his igno- 
rance. 

The next catechism goes a little further, and is in- 
tended for more advanced pupils. This book is, if 
possible, more fully endorsed ; it is called a '' Catechism 
of Catholic Doctrine." Why the Christian is left out I 
do not know. This catechism is especially approved 
for parochial schools by the Pope and Sacred Con- 
gregation of the Propagation of the Faith. Thus the 
reader has the advantage of seeing for himself exactly 
what the Church of Eome teaches in those parocljial 
schools of which we hear so much. • It is indeed de- 
sirable that the American people should study this 
matter carefully ; they will then know just what would 
be taught in the public schools if Eome could control 
them. They will also learn why American bishops and 
priests object to the public schools. 

In the authorization given by the Sacred Congrega- 
tion (in Eome), the words are, '^ Fro scholis parocliiali- 
hus ; " so there can be no mistake about the matter. 
I wish also to call attention in a special manner to 
the approbation of Cardinal Gibbons ; it is very im- 
portant in view of certain statements which he has 
made lately in an ex-officio manner. In his authoriza- 
tion of this catechism, dated Baltimore, January 3, 
1888, he says that these catechisms are '^ strongly 
marked by soundness of doctrine, simplicity and plain- 



V: INTRODUCTION. 

11088 of laiigiiiige, li spirit of faith mid tlevotion, and pre- 
cision in defining and expressing ( atliolic truths." 

Cardinal (libbons is therefore bound by every word 
contained in these catechisms. This should be noted, 
because tiiere is a remarkable dilTerence between some 
of his public utterances and the opinions, or rathei the 
doctrines, taught by liis authority. That his real opin- 
ions are stated in these books no one can deny. His 
other statements arc a sort of society mantle, to be 
put otl or on as occasion serves, and which are used to 
cloak wliat could not be openly proclaimed. 

Tlic third catechism from which I will quote is a 
large volume, and is intended for quite advanced 
})upils. This is a most important work for our present 
purpose ; I therefore give the title of this work in full. 
It is called '*A Familiar Explanation of Catholic 
Doctriije for the Family and more Advanced Students 
in Catholic Colleges, Academies and High Scliools ; for 
Persons of Culture, Old as well as Young, with a 
Popular Refutation of the Principal Modern Errors.*' 
The copy of this work now before me is dated 1888, 
and bears the same imprimatur and recommendation of 
Cardinal Gibbons. The importance to Protestants of 
a careful study of this catechism as a sure guide to the 
true teaching of Rome cannot be overestimated. I liope 
to save ministers and students much time and labor by 
giving copious extracts from this work, about the 
authority of which there cannot be a moment's ques- 
tion. I have also the advantage of knowing just how 
it is explained, where explanation is needed, in Roman 
Catholic schools ; though indeed, as Cardinal Gibbons 
lias truly said, the *^ plainness '' is so great that expla- 
nation is scarcely necessary. 



INTRODUCTION. 13 

This catechism bears also the strongest commenda- 
tion from nearly every bishop in the United States. 
The great point is not these approbations of bishops, 
however valuable, but the fact that the teaching of 
this catechism, as well as that of the other catechism, 
is infallible, because it is the authorized teaching of the 
Roman Church. What they say, the Pope says ; and 
what the Pope says, God says. One bishop expresses 
the hope that it will be ^' thumbed by every hand, 
Catholic, Protestant and Infidel." 

The author of the catechisms, the Rev, Father Miil- 
ler, has written a long and elaborate preface to that 
last mentioned which demands a passing notice. He 
strongly urges that the catechism should be taught in 
English in this country, no matter what may be the 
nativity or language of the learner, and gives the very 
sensible reason that business is done in English, 
through the medium of the English tongue, and that 
later in life the catechism will be forgotten if it is not 
learned in the language with which the learner must 
eventually become familiar. He states that many Ger- 
mans ask to have their ^^ religion " taught to them in 
English, having learned it in their youth in German, 
and having now forgotten in great part the use of their 
mother tongue (Preface, p. v.). I will call attention 
to some points in this catechism, later, which are of 
great importance for the better understanding of what 
Rome teaches, and what is scarcely less important, what 
she teaches at the present day. 

I will call attention to only one point in regard to 
infallibility. The writer says (p. xi.): ^*^Nor can a 
discussion of doctrinal points be of any great use to 
one who is not thoroughly convinced of the Divine 



It INTRODUCTION. 

uuthority of the Church. This being oucu accepted, 
everything follows logically, as a matter of course. 
Hence no one should be admitted to the one fold of 
Christ who does not firmly hold and declare that the 
Roman Catholic Church, ruled by the successor of St. 
Peter, is God's whole and sole appointed teacher of 
tlie Gospel on earth. However familiar persons may 
be witli doctrines, or however much they may believe 
our dogmas, without holding this the fundamentiil 
truth of Catholic faith they should not be allowed to 
join the Church." 

This statement is further enforced in suggestions for 
teaching children the doctrines of the Konum Church. 
And here I may say that as one of my objects is to^vrite 
a book which shall contain in as small a space as possi- 
ble all that is taught by Rome, I will use the word 
Rome, or Church of Rome, as an abbreviation. Indeed, 
in this catechism and elsewhere, the words ''Roman 
Catholic " are seldom used by the Romanist compilers 
of the catechism. Hence it should not be a cause of 
offence (which I am desirous to avoid), if we use the 
siime term. 

In the preface (p. vii.) we find the following : ''A 
Catechism of Catholic Doctrine is intended for chil- 
dren, who are naturally inclined to believe what they 
are taught. " Surely all children are naturally *' inclined 
to believe what they arc taught." '' Let them be taught 
first what they are to believe," he continues, opposing 
the plan of another compiler of catechisms, who first 
explains the doctrine to be believed. I wish to call 
special attention to this, because it is in this way that 
Rome teaches so effectively. She takes the child at the 
very dawn of reason, and before the child has received 



INTRODUCTION. 15 

any other religious ideas slie impresses her teaching. 
Hence it is that a Romanist so seldom forsakes his 
religion. All that can be done (and we know what 
that all means) by early impression is done, and done at 
the very moment when the doing is most effective to 
make the child believe this religion, and still more, to 
terrify it as to the future consequences of disbelief. In- 
deed in teaching the Roman catechism, sisters and other 
teachers are desired to make the children learn the 
question as well as the answer ; so important is it con- 
sidered that verbal accuracy should be secured. 

The next source of the information which we have 
prepared for the reader is the authorized '' Books of 
Devotion of the Roman Church.^' These books are of 
the utmost importance. For example, if a priest telL 
you that the Roman Church does not worship the Vir- 
gin Mary, you have only to look at her authorized 
'* Books of Devotion ^' to know whether he speaks the 
truth or is wilfully deceiving you. I regret to say 
that there is a great deal of wilful deceit on this and 
other subjects ; but evidence of this is so easy to ob- 
tain, if we only know where to look for it, that we 
are inexcusable if we are deceived when we have access 
to reliable sources of information. 

There is no devotion more widely practised in the 
Church of Rome than that of wearing the scapular. 
A book has been published, and is in the widest circu- 
lation, which fully and clearly explains the teaching 
of the Church of Rome on this subject. It is not a 
matter on which there can be a moment's doubt, or a 
moment's hesitation. The book is now before me. It is 
called "The Scapular Book." It is published with the 
approbation of the Most Rev. John Hughes, D D., late 



16 INTRODUCTION. 

Archbishop of New York. Rut ovcii if this book had 
not the api)robiition of uii un-hbishop. it would be in- 
vahiable as an cvidenco of t'.ic infallibk' teaching of the 
Church of Rome ; for the doctrines which it sets forth 
liave been approved by no less than four Popes : these 
Popes are Alexander V., Clement VII., Pius V., and 
Gregory XIII. {" Scapular Book/' p. 97). 

Further : Pope John XXII. issued a Bull March 
3, 1522, which, according to the teaching of Rome, 
is of course infallible. In this lie says : " I accept tlien 
this Holy Indulgence. I corroborate it, and confirm it 
on earth, as Jesus Christ, by reason of the merits of 
his glorious Mother, has conceded it in heaven." 

This book, the title of which is ''The Scapular 
Book,*' is published by the Roman Catholic Publish- 
ing House of P. J. Kennedy, New York. We can 
also know wliat Rome teaches by the Indulgenced Pray- 
ers used by Roman Catholics. These prayers are im- 
portant as evidence of authorized Roman Catholic teach- 
ing. They may be found in all Roman Catholic Prayer- 
books and Books of Devotion. These prayers are of great 
importance, as evidence of the authorized teaching 
of the Roman Catholic Church, for they are carefully 
considered before they are authorized, and a grant of 
an '' indulgence *' for repeating them invests them 
with even a verbal infallibility, for Rome would not 
declare that they would bring such grace to the soul 
if they were not an accurate expression of her doctrinal 
teaching. I do not propose to make much use of these 
prayers, because I do not wish to make this volume too 
large, and any one who has Roman Catholic friends 
can easily see a Roman Catholic Prayer-book ; but I 
would empliasizj! the fact that such prayers asare 'Mn- 



INTRODUCTION. 17 

dulgenced " are authorized by the Church and are 
therefore a true expression of her dogmatic teaching. 
1 say this because I have often found, when Roman Cath- 
olics are pressed with the manifest idolatry expressed in 
these prayers, that they excuse it by saying that they 
are not obliged to believe the expressions used in them'. 
It is important that Protestants should not be deceived 
by such a statement. They are' authorized by the 
Fopes, past and present, and hence they express the 
faith of the Church ; indeed it would be a strange thing 
if a Church published and authorized prayers for the 
use of her children which were of a doubtful char- 
acter. Hence such prayers as this : " Sweet heart of 
Mary, be my salvation/' which is indulgenced, and a 
favorite prayer of the devout Romanist, is a very plain 
expression of the faith and teaching of the Roman 
Catholic Church as to the power of Mary to save the 
sinner. I might quote hundreds of other prayers ex- 
pressing a similar faith in Mary as a saviour, but one 
will suffice. The word ^^indulgenced'' will be fully 
explained later. Here I may say briefly, that when a 
prayer is "indulgenced" the saying of it lessens the 
time of punishment in purgatory. 

There is one more book from which I will quote as 
an authority of great importance. This book is called 
"Faith of Our Fathers," i nd the author is Cardinal 
Gibbons. Nothing more need be said therefore as to 
the authoritative character of its teaching. This book 
has had a circulation of probably a million. Roman 
Catholics, always, alas! far more zealous than Protestants 
to propagate their religion, have lent, given and sold 
thousands of copies of this work to Protestants^ and 
probably more harm to the cause of truth has been 



18 INTRODUCTION. 

(lone Dv this Ijook tlian will ever he undone by any 
(Miristiiin i>ul)r('ation. Tlie position of the writer, his 
supposed liberal tendencies, and the Jesuitical manner 
in whicli tlie book is written, form a combination 
difficult to combat. The Bulls of Popes may also be 
(luoted. The originals are not easy of access, but in 
every case tliey can be verified tlirongb Roman Catho- 
lic sources. 

Before I proceed to the substance of tliis work, I 
wish to say a few words ; few, but very important, as 
to what the "Roman Catholic Church does not believe. 

Serious harm has been done to the cause of truth 
by writers and speakers \\\\o have not verified tlieir 
quotations, or who have been so ignorant of the very 
doctrines which they were condemning that they have 
made the most ludicrous blunders. It should be 
remembered that educated Konum Catholics in this 
country understand the chief doctrines of their relig- 
ion; hc^nce, if a bhmder is made, they detect it at once. 
It should also be remembered that the lower classes 
of Romanists do not always understand their religion. 
Hence in arguing with such persons a different line of 
presentation is needed. For the lower classes Rome 
simply requires a verbal knowledge of tlie catechism. 
They are to believe what tliey arc taught and dare not 
question it, or if they do so, they are taught it is at the 
peril of their eternal salvation. There is not a Church 
in the world which requires unreasoning submission, 
except the Church of Rome. The value to the Church 
of exacting this unreasoning submission is obvious. The 
result is before the world in the tenacity with whicli 
the fear-dominated Romanist refuses to discuss tlie 
subject of religion with any one whom he has been 



INTRODUCTION. 19 

taught is already damned because he does not believe 
in the infallibility of the Church. 

At the jH-escnt age Rome has found it necessary to 
provide some catechisms such as those from Avhich I 
quote in this work, in which there is some explanation 
of her doctrines. But even in these catechisms the 
learner is plainly told that he must accept the explana- 
tions as well as the doctrine without question. 

The Romanist who is beginning to see the light of 
truth is discouraged when he hears violent denuncia- 
tions of opinions which he never held, and which his 
Church never taught. Again there are certain doc- 
trines of the Romish Church which are looked at 
from one point of view by Protestants, and from quite 
another point of view by Romanists. It is worse than 
useless to argue with a Romanist from your point of 
view, for you are simply charging him with believing 
what he does not believe, and what he knows he does 
not believe. You lose your influence with him, and 
perhaps make him lose his temper with you, and griev- 
ous harm is done ; indeed it is far better to drop the 
subject for the time when there is evidence of any 
heat on either side. There are few of us so advanced 
in Christian love as to be able to enforce the Master's 
doctrine in the Master's way. It is much easier to 
denounce than to explain. It is much easier to call 
down fire from heaven than to kindle the sweet flame 
of divine love in the heart. It is true that our dear 
Lord did denounce in the severest language the Scribes 
and Pharisees, but the denunciations were few, and 
the loving entreaties were many. It maybe a supreme 
duty to denounce Rome at times, but the times are not 
of frequent occurrence. It is always the duty of every 



00 INTRODUCTION. 

Christina to win souls to Clirist, and we can always try 
to win by explanation, by loving w oids and by earnest, 
faithful prayer. 

The principal points on which Protestants are apt to 
make serious mistakes in denouncing Koman doctrines 
are, first, on the (juestion of the infallibility of the Pope. 
Protestants think, and not indeed without some reason, 
that infallibility means that the Pope cannot sin. This 
is not the Roman Catholic doctrine. AVe shall discuss 
the doctrine of the infallibility of the Pope, with expla- 
nations and proof from Roman sources, in the first 
chapter of this book, so that only a few words need be 
said here as to what Kome does not teach. The lives 
of some of the Popes have indeed been so notoriously 
wicked that it would be impossible for Rome to claim 
sinlessness as one of the qualifications of a Pope. A 
Pope may be a very wicked man, but he is infallible all 
the same ; and what we have to do is to combat the 
real errors of Rome, and not those which do not exist. 
To persons of ordinary intelligence it will be obvious 
that, in a case like this, the more clearly we understand 
the theory of our opponent the better for us, as well as 
for him. Nothing weakens a good cause so much as a 
poor defence ; above all, if arguments are brought 
forward which are of no value, and which can easily be 
shown to be of no value. I speak on this subject 
from personal and painful experiences. It is not my 
intention to allude in any way to my past history in the 
present work, but there is one i)oint on which I will 
say a word. 

In my early years 1 heard a great deal of discussion 
on the errors of the Church of Rome. For the most 
part the accusations which J heard against Rome were 



INTRODUCTION, 21 

not accurately stated, because they consisted of exagger- 
ated representations of real evils, or of accusations of 
evils which did not exist. In later life this was very 
unfortunate for me. When I learned for myself that 
much which I had heard asserted with such vehemence 
was untrue, I came to the not very wise conclusion that 
all that I had heard against Rome was false ; and I 
believe that such conclusions from such results are far 
more common than is generally supposed. If facts had 
been stated and carefully proved, then indeed I would 
have been well prepared to meet the arguments of 
Rome. If the great and real evils of the Church of 
Rome had been stated calmly and dispassionately, then 
indeed I would have been forewarned Unhappily it 
was not so. I have lived to see the same mistake made 
at the present day. I have heard some lecturers, and 
often I have heard persons in private life, denounce 
evils which do not exist, and make assertions about 
the creed and teaching of the Church of Rome which a 
Roman Catholic child could have refuted. My object 
therefore in the present work is to give facts, and, as I 
have said, to give authority for statements about the 
teaching of Rome from Roman Catholic sources. More- 
over I have the advantage of knoAving how Rome 
explains her dogmas — not a small advantage, as I well 
know, for I have heard the most serious mistakes made 
in this matter also. To give one example : I have 
often heard Protestants accuse the Romanists of wor- 
shipping a piece of bread or a "wafer god." Now the 
Romanist does not do this, and he knows that he does 
not do it ; so that all accusations to this effect are 
simply worse than useless. It is true that what is 
called *'The Host" in the Roman Catholic Church is 



23 L\TIi()ni'('Tf()X 

u piece of bruail, but it should be remembered tlmt the 
Romanist believes that it has been changed into the 
body and blood of Christ before he worships it. The 
difTerence is immense. We who do not believe in this 
change know that what Konie bows down before is 
bread, but it is not wise to put the argument on this 
ground, and to accuse the Romanist of worshipping 
bread when he does not believe what he worships to be 
bread. What we have to do is, not to charge him with 
donig what he does not do, but to show him that he is 
mistaken in his belief, which is a very different matter. 

When worshipping the host Romanists are unconscious 
idolaters; and it is shocking to hear, as I have heard, 
Protcstiints call what Romanists consider so sacred "a 
pancake god." I wish Protestants knew how they 
drive Romanists from them by such outrages on their 
most sacred feelings, and how much wiser as well as 
how much more Christian it would be to say that we 
know they do not think they are worshipping bread or 
wine, but that all the same they really do so, because 
they have no proof that the bread or the wine has 
ceased to exist, except in what Rome calls its '' acci- 
dents." But I will return to the controversial aspect 
of this matter later. 

With regard to worshii)ping the Virgin Mary, there 
is no excuse for Rome ; but as she denies doing it we must 
only point to the books authorized by her, in which she 
expressly teaclies tliis creature- worship. The case is 
quite different from that of the worship of the Host ; 
in the one case the worshipper does not adore the bread, 
for he believes Christ to have taken the place of tlie 
bread. In the worship of Mary, there is no such 
excuse possible. Rome teaches distinctly that Mary is 



INTRODUCTION, 23 

a mediator, and cannot deny tliis when brought face to 
face with her own teaching. Nor should we forget that 
Home holds many Christian truths. She believes in God, 
she believes in the Trinity, she invokes the Holy Spirit 
of God in all her offices ; she has simply added a new 
religion of her own manufacture to the old religion of the 
GospJ. I have found that there is no better way of 
arguing with Romanists than to remind them of what 
they do believe. For example : When showing them 
the sinfulness of the woi^hip of Mary, I would say, docs 
not your Church teach, and teach truly, that Jesus is 
your Saviour ? If this is so, what do you want with 
Mary, or any other saviour ? Again — if I may be par- 
doned for making another suggestion — never push an 
argument too far. It is better to let people do as much 
as possible of their own thinking; leave something to 
God and to conscience If you see that you have 
made an impression, then is the time to stop speaking, 
and let the impression remain. The old proverb, 
'^Convince a man against his will, he's of the same 
opinion still," is truer in theological argument than in 
any other, simply because our theological opinions are 
happily our strongest and most cherished opinions. 
Eemember that your opponent is as sure that he is 
right as you are that he is wrong, and let us imitate 
the patience of our dear Lord. 

All this by no means implies that we should avoid 
controversy, or practise an easy indifference to the sal- 
vation and enlightenment of our fellow-creatures under 
the plea of charity. Surely Christians will have a terri- 
ble account to give if they do not use every means in 
their power to enlighten the ignorance which is at their 
very doors ! Surely those who know and love Jesus 



2t INTRODUCTION. 

cannot be indifferont to the advancement of liis king- 
dom. Surely, to put tlie matter on lower ground, but 
on ground wliich we ought to consider, those who liave 
even a spark of love for, or pride in tlieir country, 
should leave no means unused to save it from the depths 
of degradation which has been the inevitable result in 
every country which has been under Papal rule. 

None of us may excuse ourselves. We arc all respon- 
siljle in a certiiin degree for the well-being, spiritual and 
temporal, of those around us ; and we are all responsi- 
sible for a future generation who may rise up and 
ask why we ill lowed them to be the prey of a power 
which shows no mercy to the heretic, which only needs 
opportunity to persecute to the death all who do not 
submit to its teaching and obey its commands. 



WHAT ROME TEACHES. 



CHAPTER I 



IXFALLIBILITY. 



The doctrine of the infallibility of the Church is the 
first and foundation doctrine of Rome. This is obvious. 
If Rome is infallible, there can be no argument with 
her. If she sits in the temple of God, exercising the 
very authority of God, there can be no question as to 
our obedience. Hence it is necessary first to under- 
stand what Rome means by infallibility, and then to 
know what are the consequences of this doctrine, ^or 
must we forget that Rome bases her claim to infalli- 
bility on Scripture teaching ; that is, on her interpreta- 
tion of Scripture But in order to do this, she must 
first prove that she is the only authorized interpreter of 
Scripture. 

The whole argument runs in a vicious circle. Rome 
bases her claim to infallibility on certain texts of Script- 
ure, and then when we dispute her interpretation of 
these texts she bases her right to interpret them on her 
infallibility. 

But first we will consider what Rome says on the 
subject of her own infallibility — how she defines this 



26 WHAT ROMK TEACHES. 

doctriue. And here we come face to face with facts for 
which there can be neither denial nor excuse, and which 
at once overthrow her wliole chiini to infallibility. Un- 
til the Vati(uin Council held in 1870, the Pope was not 
infallible ; if he had been infallible, there was certainly 
no need to convene a council to make him infallible. 

It is amazing how Roman Catholics with even ordi- 
nary common sense can fail to see the inconsistencies of 
their position. The fact is that they do not think, be- 
cause from the e irliest dawn of reason they have been 
taught that it is tretison against 'the Church to think. 
I am sure that this i.s the reason why so many remain 
in the Church of Rome notwithstanding her contradic- 
tory dogmas. Romanists say that the devil was the 
founder of the Protestant religion, so it is not unfair to 
retort that if the devil wanted to found a religion which 
should endure, he could not have contrived a more 
effectual plan than that of forbidding men to discuss 
their belief, or to question it for even a passing moment. 

We have then to deal with the fact that the Church 
was infallible until the year 1S70, and that in this year 
the Church handed over its infallibility to the Pope. 
To have said at any previous date that such a stupen- 
dous change couhl have been made, would have been a 
bold prediction. For nineteen centuries, according to 
the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, the Church 
was infallible ; learned treatises were written and much 
zeal was expended on this fund.iinenUil doctrine of the 
Churcli ; attention was drawn again and again to the 
grandeur and magnificence of the idea. The whole 
Churcli was to meet to decide points of doctrine, and 
what she decided was tlie will of God. Perhaps only 
those who, like myself, joined the Church when this 



INFALLIBILITY. 27 

teaching was given, coald understand all that was made 
of it. Certainly there was some grandeur, if there was 
not much truth in the idea of a harmonious Church 
deciding what the faithful were to believe. But how 
great was the change ! The Church handed over her 
infallibility to the Pope, and the teaching authority of 
which so much was said ceased to exercise its power ; 
its last act being to execute a sort of '•' happy despatch " 
at the command of a then fallible individual. 

This marvellous change in the Eoman Church has 
not met with the consideration which it requires. The 
deed was done in the very face of Europe and in this 
enlightened nineteenth century. The present genera- 
tion have almost forgotten this stupendous act, but it 
should not be forgotten. I have spoken to Catholics 
again and again, who did not seem even to know that 
such a change had taken place, tind who were per- 
plexed and amazed beyond measure when it was ex- 
plained to them. It is just here that the stern disci- 
pline of the Koman Church comes in for its protection. 
No discussion is allowed ; hence all interest in such 
subjects dies out quickly. The downward course of 
error is easy, when no hand may be raised to prevent a 
fall. It is scarcely twenty years since this change m 
the religion of the Roman Church was made. It is 
scarcely twenty years since Newman expostulated against 
it, and Archbishop Kenrick denounced it, and Bishop 
Moriarty assured the present writer that he did not be- 
lieve it ; yet the controversy it occasioned is forgotten as 
if it had never been. The generation in whose day the 
stirring events occurred have ceased to thmk of a sub- 
ject which they were told it was treason to discuss, and 
about which they were not allowed to express any 



28 WHAT ROMK TEACHES. 

opinion. The younger and rising generation learn 
their catechism, and there all ends. They scarcely 
know that the teaching of the Church has changed on 
this momentous question, or if they do know, it is no 
business of theirs ; their duty is to learn what they 
are taught, and to believe whatever they learn. 

Before the change of belief U )me was used t > assert, 
most vehemently, that such a change could never take 
place ; to-day she asserts as vehemently that she will 
never make the temporal power an article of faith. But 
I am convinced that very few years will pass before this 
last outrage on the religion of Jesus Christ will be 
accomplished and accepted with unreasoning submis- 
sion by the Catholic world. It is far easier now than 
it was formerly for Rome to add a new doctrine to lier 
Creed. It is no longer necessary to summon bishops 
from the most distant parts of the earth, or to spend 
weeks and months in deliberation of a foregone con- 
clusion. Now all that is needed is for the Pope to 
declare that the Church must believe what he asserts, 
and the thing is done ; to-morrow, if he so pleases, the 
present Pope may say that it is an article of the Chris- 
tian faith to believe that the Pope must be a temporal 
as well as a spiritual sovereign, and behold the change 
of creed is made and must be accepted. Every Catholic 
will then be obliged to believe this just as mucli as he 
IS obliged to believe that there is a God. To-day every 
Catholic is obliged to believe that the Pope has the 
]>owor to do this ; and do not let this be forgotten in 
discussing this subject with Romanists. 

But to return to tlie teaching of Rome on the subject 
of her infallibility before the year 1870. As I have 
said in the preface there were many Protestants who 



INFALLIBILITY. 29 

thought that infallibility and impeccability were one 
and the same thing. There were others also who, not 
without cause, were very uneasy at the growing ])o\ver 
of the Pope. It was the object of the Roman Catholic 
Church to soothe all this excitement, and to lull Protes- 
tant minds into a fatal security ; hence they almost 
made light of the personal authority of the Pope. 
Certainly the fathers who formed the teaching body of 
the Church, and presided in all the once infallible 
General Councils, never dreamed of such a thing as the 
personal infallibility of the Pope, and their own conse- 
quent undoing ; hence strong expressions were used 
to satisfy Protestants that the Church never taught — as 
certainly she never did teach — the personal infallibility 
of the Pope ; and further, it was loudly and authori- 
tatively declared that the Church never would teach 
this doctrine. 

In the Rev. Stephen Keenan^s " Controversial Cate- 
chism " (which was taught to Roman Catholic children, 
and to all who needed instruction), in all editions 
printed before the Vatican Council, there was the 
following question and answer : 

"Q. Must not Catholics believe the Pope himself 
to be infallible ? 

" A. This is a Protestant invention ; it is no article 
of the Catholic faith. No decision of his can bind on 
pain of heresy, unless it be received and enforced by 
the teaching body — that is, by the Bishops of the 
Church." 

In all editions printed since the Vatican Council 
this question and answer is omitted, and without a 
word of explanation. This catechism had the appro- 
bation of the late Archbishop Hughes of New York, 
and was in general use. And yet Romanists say that 



hO WHA T R OME TEA CHEFi, 

the teaching of tlio Konuin Ciitliolic Church never 
chjiiiges ! Here i;ertjiinly is :i ch;uiir<'. :in«l ii stupendous 
one, since wimt was once condemned as '• a Protestant 
invention'' is now the received doctrine of the Church 
of Rome, and one moreover whicli Roman Catholics 
are obliged to believe, under pain of sin, as much as 
the doctrine of the Trinity. 

Do not let it be forgotten that Rome requires nU\\GV 
doctrines to be believed, and that they must be be- 
lieved under pain of eternal damnation. 

One of the difficulties which Protestants have in 
understiinding Roman Catholic doctrine is caused by 
the evasiveness and trickery of Roman Catholics when 
they are asked any question about the belief of their 
Church. Protestants are not prepared for statements 
which are deliberately misleading, and whicli do mis- 
lead, to the infinite hurt of those who are so deceived. 
If I could in any degree succeed in arousing Protes- 
tants to this danger, then this work would not have 
been written in vain. So plausible are some Catholic 
statements that it is little wonder people take them 
for facts, when they are really falsehoods. It is not 
difficult to know what Rome teaches, if we judge from 
what she says, in the books which she uses to teach 
her own people. Books written for the benefit of con- 
fiding Protestants never tell the plain facts, because 
the plain facts dare not be told. As an example of 
this we may notice the serious di (Terence between the 
statements made by Cardinal Gibbons. 

I will g'.ve one or two more extracts from well-known 
Roman theologians, to show that the infallibility of 
the Pope was not a doctrine of the Roman Church 
previous to the year 1870 ; but in truth it is scarcely 



INFALLIBILITY. 31 

necessary to do this. If the Church had taught and 
believed that the Pope was personally infallible pre- 
vious to this period, clearly there would have been no 
necessity for the assembling of a council to make him 
infallible. 

Dr. John Milner wrote a very celebrated work in 
defence of the Roman Church called ''' End of Relig- 
ious Controversy." In this work he says: ^'It is no 
article of Catholic Faith to believe that the Pope is in 
himself infallible, separated from the Church, even in 
expoundnig the Faith. By consequence, Papal defini- 
tions or decrees, in whatever form pronounced, taken 
exclusively of a General Council or acceptance of the 
Church, oblige none, under pain of heresy, to interior 
assent." 

Veron, the Jesuit, in his celebrated work, "The 
Rule of Catholic Faith," which Dr. Murray, the Ro- 
mish bishop, in his examination before a committee of 
the House of Commons (Report, March 22, 1825), 
classed among others as one " in which is found the 
most authentic exposition of the faith of the Catholic 
Church," says : 

'* The Pope, in whatever character, or however sol- 
emnly he may give his opinion, even in scholastic 
phraseology ex cathedra, is not the universal Church, 
and consequently whatever may be his private opinion, 
and however declared, such opinion is not, on that 
account, propounded by the Catholic Church as an 
article of faith. ... In fact, it is clear from 
Bellarmine himself that it has never been defined 
by the Church that the Pope is infallible when un- 
assisted by a General Council, nor that any doctrine 
advanced and proposed by him is, in consequence of 
such a proposal, a:; article of Catholic faith. All 
divines consequently are agreed, as Bellarmine allows, 



/ 



82 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

that rupul infallibility is no doctrine of the Catholic 
Church, aiul tliis is certain hovond all controversy" 
(pp. 13. 14). 

•* It is not of faith that when the Konian Pontiff 
teaches anythini]^, either assisted by his own private 
council or by a provincial svnod. even though he ad- 
dressed the I'nivursal Church, or, as it is termed, speaks 
ex cathedra, in a word, so long as he is not the supreme 
judge of controversies, he is not infallible, nor would a 
decree passed under these circumstances be of faith, 
unless the opinion of the Church were, from other 
sources, cleiirlv ascertained to have been pronounced in 
his favor'' (p.* i:J3). 

*• Dr. l*urcell. Bishop of Cincinnati, in his contro- 
versy with ^Ir. Campbell, said, * \o enlightened Cath- 
olic holds the Pope's infallibility to be an article of 
faith. I do not, and none of my brethren that I know 
of do.^" 

We have now given Roman Catholic authority to 
prove that the new doctrine of the Pope's personal in- 
fallibility N\as not the doctrine of the Church of Rome 
until the present century ; surely this fact alone dis- 
proves the very infallibility which it seeks to maintain. 
The great cry of Rome is, that she never changes, that 
her creeds never vary, that she is above all relig- 
ious discussion, and many thoughtless Protestants 
have entered the Church of Rome under the delu- 
sion that the creed of that Church never changes. 
It has changed within the last twenty years, it has 
changed in previous ages, and it will probably change 
before the })resent century closes, for active efforts 
are already being made to prepare the world for 
the announcement that the temporal })owerof the Pope 
must be bt'lieved as an article of faith. And yet our 
dear I^rd has said, " My kingdom is not of this world." 
What a terrible fall it will be for the Church of IJome 



INFALLIBILITY. 33 

when she acts in direct opposition to the very words of 
Ilim whom she claims to be her Master. 

There is a remarkable quotation in Cardinal Gibbons' 
book ^* Faith of Our Fathers." He quotes from the 
very highest authority, to prove that ^^no Catholic 
claims that the Pope is inspired, or endowed with 
divine revelation properly so called. 

'' For, the Holy Spirit was not promised to the suc- 
cessors of Peter in order that they might spread abroad 
new doctrines which he reveals, but that, under his 
assistance, they might guard inviolably, and with fidel- 
ity explain, the revelation or deposit of faith handed 
down by the Apostles." And in order to show that 
this is the teaching of the Church, he quotes from the 
bull of the Vatican Council. '' Faith of Our Fathers " 
(p. 147). 

All this is very well for American Protestants who do 
not know Kome, and for uneducated Catholics ; yet 
shortly before the Vatican Council Cardinal Wiseman 
wrote : '^ The essential principle for which we (Roman- 
ists) are contending is no modern invention whatever, 
but as old as (Roman) Catholic theology itself. The 
principle is that the Church (of Rome) possesses the 
power, and has from time to time exercised it, of rais- 
ing into the rank of doctrines of faith propositions 
which previously to her definition were not such." 

The above statement is a self-evident fact. One 
knows^not which to marvel most at, the simplicity of 
Protestants who believe such patent sophistries, or the 
ingenuity of the Romanists who invent them. Here 
we are told on the very highest authority possible, that 
the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of 
Peter that they might spread abroad new doctrine; 



84 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

they are only to guard and explain what lias already 
been revealed ; and yet we have given the highest 
authority of the Uoman Church to prove that the new 
doctrine of the personal infallibility of the Pope was 
not believed nor enforced for nearly nineteen hundred 
years. How could it be said, then, that this doctrine 
was " handed down " from the time of the Apostles and 
only now '^ explained " ? 

I proceed to give extracts from the catechism now in 
use and which gives the present teaching of the Homan 
Church on the subject of infallibility. 

The first catechism, intended for the youngest children 
and for confiding Protestants who need to be gradually 
introduced to the tenets of the Roman Church, is a re- 
markable production when viewed in the light of a 
knowledge of the purposes of the compilers. The 
questions on the subject of the infallibility of the Pope 
are a model of caution and mystification. It is evident 
that it would not do to make too sudden a change, so 
the infallibility of the Church and the Pope is judi- 
ciously mixed. 

*' Q. What do you mean bv the infallibility of the 
Church ? 

** A. By the infallibility of the Church I mean that 
the Church cannot err when it teaches a doctrine of 
faith or moi-als. 

'' Q. When does the Church teacli infallibly ? 

**' A. 'J1ie Church teaches infallibly when it speaks 
through the Pope and bishops united in general coun- 
cil, or through the Pope alone when he proclaims 
to all the faithful a doctrine of faith or morals. 

** Q. In whom are tliese attributes found in their 
fulness ? 

^*A. These attributes are found in their fulness in 
the Pope, the visible head of the Chureh, whose infal- 



INFALLIBILITY. 85 

lible authority to teacli bishops, priests and people in 
matters of faith or morals will last to the end of the 
world." 

Now it will be observed from this series of questions 
that the new doctrine of the personal infallibility of 
the Pope is very deftly introduced, and an impression is 
.left on the mindv that the Church also is infallible. 
The absurdity of two infallible authorities would not 
strike those who are not permitted to reason, nor 
would Protestants be at all likely to see it. The ques- 
tion, "'When does the Church teach infallibly?" 
is merely left in as a " blind " for the benefit of those 
who may ask. Why, has the Church ceased to be infalli- 
ble? It certainly has so ceased since the Pope was 
made infallible ; for Rome can hardly maintain that 
there are two infallible authorities. The Pope being 
infallible without the Church, as we shall show presently, 
the Church ceases to be infallible, as it cannot speak 
without the Pope, and in fact is no longer able to 
speak, having signed away its own rights; rights which 
were so long and loudly proclaimed. 

Before noticing the definition of infallibility given in 
the catechism for advanced pupils, it may be well to 
place before the reader the exact words in which the 
infallibility of the Pope was proclaimed by the Vatican 
Council. It is certainly a curious document, and de- 
serves far more attention than it has ever received. 
Romanists are of course obliged to believe it without 
the least attempt to understand it ; indeed it is possi- 
ble^ we might say certain, that not one Romanist in 
five thousand has ever seen it. They are taught in the 
catechism that the Pope is infallible, and there is an 
end of the matter ; the why, or the how, or the when. 



86 WHAT ROME TEACHER, 

or the wlieiv, is no concern of theirs. We may note 
here also that the doctrine of the Ininiucuhite Concep- 
tion of tlie Virgin Mary, of which we sliall cpeak later, 
had been prochiinied some time before by a general 
council, and there waa not one word of its being the 
duty or privilege of the Pope to proclaim this doctrine. 

Such are the inconsistencies of Rome. The very 
same Pope holds a council in Rome to proclaim a cer- 
tain doctrine, and the next time a council is convened 
he practically compels that council to declare that it 
luis no more authority, and that he can proclaim any 
doctrine without any council. It should also be ob- 
served that in this carefully prepared statement the 
Pope is credited not only with the power to proclaim 
doctrines, but he is also made the infallible judge of 
^'morals.'' Where in Scripture is there even the faint- 
est hint of the possibility of such a power being Tested 
even in an inspired Apostle? 

Observe also the expression, " not from the consent of 
the Church." 'J'his is very important as being a dec- 
laration of its own abdication of power by the Church. 
Observe also the expression that the Pope has this new 
power by *'the Divine assistance promised to liim in 
blessed Peter." Surely the Church took a long time 
to find out this promise. Jn what this promise con- 
sisted we shall show presently. 

Tlie following is the declaration of his own infalli- 
bility, made by Pius IX., adopted by the \'atican Coun- 
cil of 1870 : 

" Wherefore faithfully adhering to the tradition re- 
ceived from the beginning of the Christian Faith, for 
the glory of God our Saviour, the exaltation of tlie 
Catliolic religion, and the sjilvation of the Christian 



INFALLIBILITY. 37 

people, We, tlie Sacred Council, approving, teach and 
define that it is a dogma divinely revealed ; that the 
Roman Pontiff, when speaking ex cathedra — that is, 
when, discharging the office of pastor and teacher of 
all Christians, by virtue of his supreme authority, he 
defines a doctrine regarding faith and morals to be 
held by the Universal Church — he, by the Divine as- 
sistance promised to him in blessed Peter, is possessed 
of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer 
willed the Church should be endowed in defining doc- 
trine regarding faith or morals ; and that, therefore, 
such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable 
of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church. 
But if any one — which may God avert — presume to 
contradict this our definition, let him be anathema.'^ 

Now there is one other point worthy of special note 
in this connection. If the Pope was " always infalli- 
ble " as an individual, and if it did not require the 
'' consent of the Church" (see above) to make his de- 
cisions infallible, how was it that he asked the consent 
of the Church to make him infallible ? If the Pope 
was infallible without the Church, why did he find it 
necessary to ask the Church to make him infallible? 
The truth is that the whole business was the greatest 
farce ever enacted in the sacred name of God. 

Scripture tells us that, at the first Council of Jerusa- 
lem, St. Peter was not the infallible decider of the sub- 
j'^cts discussed, and that at Antioch a decision was 
given against him. But how can a Roman Catholic 
know this when he is not allowed to read the Bible 
which would tell him this plain truth? No Roman 
Catholic book or catechism w^ill tell him what the Bible 
tells him, that St. Paul ^'withstood'' St. Peter to the 
face, because he was to '^ be blamed." Imagine the 
fate of a bishop to-day who should follow the example 



88 WHA T R OME TEA CHES. 

of St ruiil and dare to blame a Pope. It is true he 
would only bo excommuuicated at the present day, but 
he would escape deatli merely because it would not now 
be possible for the liead of his Church to burn him 
alive. 

Moreover, this rebuke of Peter was made in the 
most public manner possible. It was made, St. Paul 
himself tells us, " before them all " (Gal. ii. 14). 
Before the whole Church assembled at Antioch St. 
Paul denounced St. Peter. It would seem indeed very 
plain that the great fault of St. Peter at that time was 
dissimulation — a curious coincidence in view of all the 
dissimulations of the Church of Rome which claims 
him as its founder. Ue said one thing before the 
Jews, and another thing before the Gentiles. The 
Church of Rome has followed him in his dissimulations, 
but, alas ! not in his repentance. 

St. Paul knew better. Ever bold and brave for 
truth, what a clean sweep he would have made of the 
tergiversiitions of the Roman Church of to-day. Were 
lie in the flesh there would be no mental reservations 
or jierverted quotations of Scripture, or of the much- 
maligned fathers. 

The next question in the catechism is, ** What 
special gift did Christ ask for St. Peter as the teacher 
of his whole Church ?" Is it necessary to point out 
the diplomacy of this question and its effects on a con- 
fiding mind — the mind of one who has been brought 
up to look on the priest who teaches him ts of so 
saintly a life that it would be absolutely impossible 
for him to lie or equivocate ? Study this question 
carefully and you liave the key to many subjec ts which 
would otherwise be ])erplexing. First, you eee it is 



INFALLIBILITY. 39 

taken as an accepted fact that Christ made St. Peter 
the head of the Church. It is taken as a matter of 
course about which there can be no doubt. The idea 
is fixed firmly in the mind of the young and ignorant 
child as an eternal verity. The answer is a piece of 
the most audacious falsehood, may I say, which has 
ever disgraced Christian teaching : '^ Christ asked his 
heavenly Father to bestow on St. Peter the special gift 
of teaching infallibly his whole doctrine/' Yet St. 
Peter was not asked to teach when he assisted at the 
Council of Jerusalem. But what Roman Catholic 
child can ever know this when the Bible is so carefully 
kept out of sight ? Then with marvellous audacity a 
text is quoted to prove this necessary doctrine ; for 
unless it could be shown that Christ made St. Peter 
infallible the claim of his successor falls to the ground : 
** I have prayed for thee, that faith fail not ; and thou, 
being once converted {sic), confirm thy brethren.'^ 
Surely by no stretch of argument can one word be 
found here which implies that the gift of infallibility 
was conferred on Peter. 

Our dear Lord, knowing Peter's weakness, prays 
that ^^ his faith may not fail." He does not say that 
it will not fail, nor has this prayer the least refer- 
ence to any one or anything but St. Peter's own 
personal state before God. It is his faith that our 
Lord prays for ; and yet Eome declares that it was the 
faith of the ^''Church" that was prayed for. Alas! 
notwithstanding that prayer, the faith of Peter failed 
within a few short hours ; for he who prayed for Peter 
would not compel Peter to accept the grace which he 
mercifully asked for him, since Peter had to stand or 
fall by his own will for good or evil. Certainly there 



40 WHAT ROME TEACHES, 

is not one word here of 'teaching his brethren/' either 
infallibly or otherwise. But the child, accustomed to 
believe that whatever is taught must be true, believes 
the interpretation without question ; and the end of 
Rome is gained. Again and again the same stqjpressio 
veri and the same begging the question is used. It is 
taught that St. Peter was infallible, and that the Pope 
is his successor and also infallible, and all by the ex- 
press act of Christ himself. The cool assurance with 
which it is stated, as a matter of fact, that ** Christ 
asked his heavenly Father for the gift of infallibility 
for St. Peter '' would be amusing if it were not so little 
short of blasphemous. The Po])e, says the catechism, 
is "infallible by the special assistance of the Holy 
Ghost promised him in (sic) St. Peter.*' One asks in 
amazement, AVhen and where w^as this promise made ? 
But it is reserved for the conclusion of this chapter to 
make a deliberate misquotation from Scripture. The 
catechism teaches that " the Catholic Church is to 
last to the end of the world ; for Christ says, ' The 
gates of hell shall not prevail against my Church.* " 
Is it not a logical sequence, if these promises are granted, 
that ths next chapter should be Pleaded, '* No Salva- 
tion out of the Catholic Church '* ? 

In the second catechism of which I spoke in the in- 
troduction, the learner is taught thus : In the chapter 
on the Holy Catholic Church the question is asked, 
** Whom did Christ appoint the visible head and chief 
pastor of his Church ? " and the reply is ** St. Peter.*' 
Here we have for the first time an attempt at Script- 
ural proof, as follows : *' I sjiy to thee, Thou art Peter, 
and upon this rock I will build my Church.*' So far 
there is apparent Scripture authority. The child is 



INFALLIBILITY. 41 

not to know that the text is interpreted according to 
Kome, and never suspects that the rock on which 
Christ built his Church was the truth expressed in 
Peter's confession. 

The value to Eome of this kind of instruction will 
be easily seen. Neither then, nor at any later period of 
life has the Eoman Catholic any opportunity of know- 
ing that any other interpretation has been or could be 
put upon this text other than that which Rome puts 
upon it. So Rome, arguing in a vicious circle, bases 
her authority not on the word of God, but on her in- 
terpretation of the word of God, which is quite an- 
other matter. The child thus taught is simply left in 
helpless ignorance. 

But Rome has a further point to gain. She must 
not only prove that St. Peter is the divinely appointed 
head of the Church, but she must prove also that the 
Popes have equal power. 

*' Q. What power had St. Peter as supreme head of 
the Church ? 

^^A. Peter had the power to govern the whole 
Church of Christ, the pastors, and the faithful, make 
laws for them, and enforce these laws." 

(Observe the claim of power to ''enforce." This 
is the first note of the Roman Inquisition.) There is 
no text quoted to prove all this, probably because by 
no possible amount of distortion could such a text be 
found. 

'^Q. What special gift did Christ ask of his heav- 
enly Father for St. Peter, as the teacher of his whole 
Church ? 

" A. Christ asked of his heavenly Father to bestow 
upon St. Peter the special gift of teaching infallibly 



43 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

his wliolo doctrine. ' I have prayed for thee/ said our 
divine Saviour to St. Peter, * that tliy faith fail not ; 
and thou, being once converted, confirm thy breth- 
ren'" (Luke xxii. 32). 

Now for a sample of special pleading this is certainly 
unique. Everj'thing is taken for granted ; nothing is 
proved. The word '^confirm'' is used instead of the 
word '^ strengthen : " another evidence of how Rome, 
when she appeals to Scripture, changes its meaning to 
serve her purpose. But even as the text is quoted by 
Kome, there is not one word in it to support the raoi;- 
Btrous assertion that *' Christ asked for Peter the 
special gift of tetvohing infallibly his whole doctrine.'* 
There is not even anything approaching such an ex- 
pression. But Roman Catholic children who are taught 
this catechism are not allowed to reason about the 
matter or to discuss it ; their duty begins and ends 
with learning the words of the catechism. 

Let it be observed that St. Peter is always called the 
lirst Pope and the '' first Bishop of Rome ;" thus the 
minds of the young arc familiarized and impressed with 
this idea. The dishonest use of the expression about 
Peter being the first Pope is naturally accepted by Roman 
Catholics, and often by inquiring Protestants, as quite 
sufficient proof of the supposed fact that there were 
always '' popes. '* The use of words and expressions 
which were never heard of for long centuries after the 
times in which they are alleged to have been in com- 
mon use, is not honest; but it answers the purpose for 
which it is intended. For skill in what logicians call 
suppressio veri, or the concealing of truth to answer a 
purpose, Rome is unsurpassable. 

We now proceed to consider what is tiiught in the 



INFALLIBILITY. 43 

catechism for more advanced pupils, for persons of 
"culture/' for the advanced pupils of colleges, etc. 
As might be expected, doctrine is elaborated in these 
catechisms ; and if it is not explained, its effects and 
bearings are very plainly pointed out. 

This catechism in fact deals with the consequences 
of the doctrine of Papal infallibility, a matter of the 
gravest importance to the Protestants of this country. 
Here the plain naked truth is told without gloss or 
subterfuge, and the authoritative nature of these state- 
ments cannot be questioned. It is a grim contrast to 
the sweetly flowing sentences of Cardinal Gibbons' 
"Faith of Our Fathers," where everything is toned 
down to please the Protestant reader and to conceal the 
stern truth. Again let me remind the reader that the 
catechism from which I am about to quote bears the 
imprimatur of Cardinal Gibbons ; he is therefore 
bound by every word in the book. 

As the consideration of the consequences of the new 
doctrine of Papal infallibility is of great importance, I 
reserve its discussion for a separate chapter. Before 
turning to another subject, we will note a few more 
points in regard to the teaching given in this catechism. 

One bishop says he wishes he had "money enough 
to send a copy to every house in the United States," 
and wishes he could "see it thumbed by Protestants 
and infidels." So zealous is Rome to spread her faith. 
It has a long and elaborate preface, in which the 
following noteworthy statements are made. The writer 
insists strongly that the fundamental doctrine of Rome 
is her infallibility, "divinely conferred on her," and 
declares truly that it is " no use to discuss controversial 
points unless this doctrine is first accepted .'' This is 



44 WHA T R OME TEA CHES. 

obvious, for once you admit tlio infallibility of the 
Church there is nothing to discuss ; you have only to 
bo told what you are to believe. This is the reason, lie 
says, why it should be plainly stated that there is no 
Siilvation outside of the Roman Church. Further lie 
says: ''The child must have learned before he leaves 
school that only the Catholic Church is the teacher 
from God, and the reasons why salvation out of her is 
impossible.'' This is also the teaching which Cardinal 
Gibbons requires to be given to the young. He pro- 
vides a very different expression of opinion to be 
perused by Protestants in his widely circulated '^ Faith 
of Our Fathers.'* 

All the statements in the previous catechisms are 
again reiterated. Rome knows well the value of rep- 
etition, and of continuing to impress the same idea 
on the minds of the young. The subject of the head- 
ship of St. Peter is elaborated, and the authority of 
the Pope is pressed on the learner by every possible 
argument. Here again the priest has the advantage, 
lie can quote or misquote, and his learner can never 
be the wiser. Quotations are now given from the 
fathers, which also must be taken for granted by the 
pupil. How could he verify them, or know whether 
their accuracy has ever been disputed? 

The question is asked, " Did St. Peter exercise his 
power as head and chief pastor of the Church ? '' And 
it is answered in the affirmative with ihe happy reck- 
lessness of one who speaks infallibly, and therefore 
cannot be contradicted. It would be impossible to give 
all the reasons adduced for the statement that the 
other Apostles recognized St. Peter as their head. One 
must suffice as a sample of what is taught to the youth 



INFALLIBILITY, 45 

of this country : ''It is because the Evangelists always 
name St. Peter first!" 

In this advanced catechism the supremacy of the 
Pope is the one great topic of instruction. The pupil 
is taught that he is '' cursed who does not believe that 
the Pope is the successor of St. Peter." Indeed even 
if Rome had not especially taught, in her most solemn 
decrees, that every Protestant is already damned, she 
would have proved that such is her teaching by her 
anathemas on those who differ from her. It is greatly 
to be regretted that Protestants do not know, or, if 
they do know, that they are indifferent to all this. An 
elaborate instruction on the infallibility of the Pope 
comes next, and a construction of all that is in- 
volved in that claim. It was well indeed to have 
preceded this instruction with the infallible assur- 
ance of the eternal damnation of those who would not 
believe all these things. Here the author goes a step 
further in misquoting the words of Christ. How ter- 
rible is the blindness of those who thus bring on 
themselves not the anathema of man, but the very 
anathema of God : " Add not unto his words lest he 
reprove thee, and thou be found a liar" (Proverbs 
XXX. 6). 

Note well the evasion of truth, and remember once 
more that those who are thus taught may never have 
even one opportunity of knowing how they have been 
deceived. 

The question is asked : ''How do we know that the 
Pope as successor to St. Peter possesses the gift of 
infallibility?" The answer is: "We know it from 
Christ's own words; for he told St. Peter that by his 
prayer to his heavenly Father he had obtained this 



46 WHA T R OME TEA CHES. 

gift of infallibility for him and all liis Buccossors." Is 
it not iimazing that human credulity could be so im- 
poseil upon in this enlightened age? How is the hap- 
less student to know that Christ never said this to St. 
Peter? Well may Rome secure that her people shall 
be kept in ignorance before she begins to teach them, 
and well may she forbid them to ** search the Script- 
ures,'* lest they should find that such words were never 
uttered or even implied by our divine Lord. 

Then follow the most important instructions for the 
youth of this country as to the power of tlie Pope, 
which is taught to be supreme in everything. " The 
Pope could not discharge his office as teacher of all 
nations unless ho was able with i}ifitUlbh certain ft/ 
to prescribe and condemn doctrines, loijical, scientific, 
physiraJ, mctapJiijsical or jHjliticdl of any ki?id." (The 
italics are as given in the catechism.) But there is yet 
more. It is obvious that the Church must not only 
have authority, but also her authority must extend to 
the decision of what subjects she can control and de- 
cide. Hence the learner is told that ** the Church only 
can judge how far her authority goes." '^ Whatever 
she teaches we are l">ii!id to believe.'' It is indeed self- 
evident that once the doctrine of infallibility is accepted 
as a doctrine declared by God himself, there could be 
no more limit to its authority than there could be to 
the authority of God. In fact the Iloman Churcli 
knows no difference between the authority of Go*l and 
the authority of the Pope. Practically, however, the 

: liority of the Pope is the highest, for he can always 
!joak and compel submission, while God leaves us to 

arn from the voice of conscience. In matters that 

c not of sin the Christian has a clmicr. in the re- 



INFALLIBILITY. 47 

ligion of Rome the Romanist has no clioice ; he is 
obliged to submit to the authority of the Pope even in 
matters indifferent in themselves. Is it any wonder 
that Rome succeeds as a temporal power until in very 
wantonness she exceeds all moderation, and her own 
people revolt from her intolerable tyrannies ? 

We do not wish here to enter into a disputed ques- 
tion of prophecy, but surely it looks as if the Pope was 
indeed sitting in the temple of God showing himself as 
God. Again in this catechism the outrageous statement 
is made tliat " the divine assistance (infallibility) was 
promised (by Christ) to St. Peter, and in Peter to his 
successors, independent of the Church.^' One is al- 
most inclined to exclaim : Poor Peter ! How utterly 
unconscious he was of all the honor and dignity which 
his so-called successors claim ! Then an apostolic letter 
from the Pope is quoted, which desires that students 
should have ^^the Summa of St. Thomas open on their 
desks to seek therefrom guidance and theological con- 
clusions." What a poor substitute for the living word 
of God ! But it is safe to allow students to read and 
seek guidance from St. Thomas ; the Bible would be 
very dangerous ! 

The expression " independent of the Church '^ is 
almost amusing, when we consider that the Pope was 
not declared to be infallible ^' independent of the 
Church" until the present century. If Christ made 
this promise to St. Peter, why was it not known sooner, 
and when and where was this promise made ? 



CHAPTER TT. 

THE POLITICAL, MORAL AND SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES 
OF THE DOCTRINE OF PAPAL INFALLIBILITY. 

We now proceed to consider the consequences of 
belief in tlie doctrine of the personal infallibility of 
the Pope. It is a matter of the gravest moment. We 
are not left in any doubt as to the claims of the Pope, 
and if the people of this country find later that, to 
their grievous hurt, they have been ignorant of these 
claims, they cannot plead the excuse of want of oppor- 
tunities of knowledge. There is only this to be observed, 
that books have been published and words have been 
said which we must say have been put forward with 
the evident object of misleading those who, as we have 
said elsewhere, would turn away in indignant disgust if 
tliey knew what Rome really teaches. 

We see that the infallibility of the Church in previ- 
ous ages, and still more the infallibility of tlie J*ope 
to-day, demands the absolute and unconditional sub- 
mission of every human being on the face of the earth 
to the Papal power. Look at it for a moment ; not as 
you view it, but as Rome teaches it. Suppose, for the 
sake of argument — or rather for the sake of better 
understanding the case — that Rome was right : that 
Christ himself had, to use the words of this catechism, 
" promised the divine assistiUice (infallibility) to Peter, 
and in Peter to his successors, independent of the 
Churrh " (the italics are in the original), would not we 



CONSEQUENCES OF INFALLIBILITY. 49 

be bound to submit ourselves body and soul to this 
absolutely divine power ? Eemember that Rome claims 
that the Pope occupies the very place of God on earth, 
and what limit could there be to the obedience due to 
such a person ? We can only allude here to the serious 
divisions by which the Church of Rome was rent when 
the Pope insisted on having himself declared infallible. 
All that could be done was done and has been done, to 
conceal these divisions ; but all the same the evidence 
of them remains. Hence in this catechism and in all 
such books intended for the more educated class of 
Romanists, every care is taken to put forward the new 
doctrine as if it had always been believed in the Church. 
Again and again it is said that the Pope cannot pro- 
claim any new doctrine ; that he can only define what 
the faithful should believe. This is a most specious 
argument. It is obvious that it would be too great 
a strain even on the blind obedience of the Romanist, 
if he was obliged to believe that the Pope could make 
a new religion. That the Pope has done so there is no 
question to any intelligent mind ; but what matter is 
it to the Romanist whether he has done so or not, for 
he is obliged to believe whatever the Pope says, and the 
Pope sa3'S he has not. It matters little whether black 
is black or white is white ; Rome speaks, and there the 
matter ends. 

We now proceed to show what this doctrine of infalli- 
bility involves. It involves this : That whatever the 
Pope says on any subject, no matter what that subject 
may be, the whole world is bound to believe it; and 
no matter what the Pope requires to be done, the 
whole world is bound to do it. A great effort 
is made by Romanists to conceal from Protestants 



ftO WHA T R OME TEA CHER. 

all that is involved in this doctrine of Pajml infallibility. 
ProtesUmts would shrink with horror^ — and they ought 
to shrink with horror— if they only knew what is the real 
and infallible teaching of the Church of Rome. But 
there is no excuse for not knowing. Wo give here, not 
the opinion of this or that bishop, nor the statement of 
Protestant controversialists, but the very authorized 
words of the Church of Uonio herself. No clearer 
proof can be given. The stiitements are incontroverti- 
ble. At page 126 of the third catechism mentioned, we 
find the following question and answer : 

**Q. In what matters is the Pope infallible? 
** A. The Pope is infallible in all matters of faith and 
morals." 

The consequence of this teaching is that no Koman 
Catholic can tell to-day what religious belief he may 
be called upon to profess to-morrow. For example, as 
we have s;iid, the Pope may at any moment declare, 
and probably will declare, that it is a doctrine which 
must be believed under pain of eternal damnation, 
that the Popes should have temporal power. It is said 
of course that each new doctrine is not new, that it was 
always believed in the Church, that the Pope only 
says it was always so believed ; but surely a child could 
refute such a fallacy. If it was always believed, what is 
the use of saying now that it must be believed ? What of 
the millious of Roman Catholics who have died without 
believing what you to-day must believe or be eternally 
damned ? If they are not damned for not believing it, 
why should you be damned for not believing it? If 
they are not in the flames of eternal torment for teach- 
ing that the infallibility of the Pope was a Protestant 
invention, why should you be damned for following 



CONSEQUENCES OF INFALLIBILITY. 51 

their example ? To such folly are men driven when 
they stray from the plain Gospel of Christ. 

On the same page we find the following question 
and answer : 

*' Q. Is the Pope infallible only in matters of revela- 
tion ? 

" A. The Pope is infallible not only in the matter 
of revealed truths ; he is indirectly infallible in all 
truths which, though not revealed, ae so intimately 
connected with revealed truths that the deposit of faith 
and morals cannot be guarded, explained and defended 
without an infallible discernment of such unrevealed 
truths." 

This question and answer must be carefully consid- 
ered by those who wish to understand the faith of the 
Roman Catholic Church, whether they are Catholics or 
Protestants. There is some show of Scripture brought 
forward for the claim of the Pope to infallibility in doc- 
trine, but where is there one word in the Bible of this 
almost ludicrous claim of ''indirect infallibility " ? It 
is very far from being '^ indirect ;" it is in the plainest 
and most direct language a claim that the Pope is as 
God on earth, for there is nothing on the earth which 
he has not the power to control and direct, and no sub- 
ject whatever on which he does not claim obedience. 
Until this bold step was taken of proclaiming the Pope 
infallible, there was some little show of liberality in the 
Church of Rome ; but observe how the chains of men- 
tal slavery are wound around the unhappy victim of 
this new doctrine. Not only is the Pope infallible in 
doctrine, but he is universally infallible, and of this I 
will give further and stronger proof if possible. The con- 
tradictions to which Roman theologians commit them- 



5d 1 1 //.I r liOMK TEA CUES. 

solves are rcmarkablo. In t Iiu question and answer given 
above, it is said that tlie Pope is *^ infallibly able to 
discern unroveiilcd truths," and yet in a previous page 
we are told lliat he cannot do this ; that he can only 
"define" truth which lias already been revealed. 
Truly the infallible l*ope would need some fallible })er- 
son to point out his inconsistencies and fulhicies. 

So long as the infallibility resided in the Church, 
this multifarious infallibility could not be claimed. 
The Church could not be assembled at every moment to 
decide some triflmg **])oIitu((I, mct(i])hysica1 or scientific'' 
subject ; nor indeed did the Church claim any such ex- 
ceptional authority. But now all is changed. An in- 
dividual can do what a body of men could not do ; but 
what a revolution in the religious belief of a Church 
which is continually boasting that she is unchangeable ! 

We are told in one breath that the Pope teaches no 
new doctrine and in the next that he can infallibly dis- 
cern "unrevealed truths ; " both statements cannot be 
true, and yet Koine expects us to believe both state- 
ments. The next question is : 

*' Q. Explain this truth more clearly ? 

"A. The Pope could not discharge his office as 
teacher of all nations, unless he were able, with infalli- 
ble certainty, to prescribe and condemn doctrines, higi- 
cfiL srient\fu\ phi/siral or political of lunj kind. " (Note 
that the italics are in the original.) 

Now do not let us hear any more of the farce that 
Kome does not interfere in politics or in science. Car- 
dinal Gibbons has especially authorized this catechism, 
and even if he had not done so the Papal authorization 
of it makes its teachings binding on the conscience of 
everv Romanist in the world. In the commencement 



CONSEQUENCES OF INFALLIBILITY. 53 

of this work, Cardinal Gibbous has especially com- 
mended it for " plainness of language^," and certainly he 
has done so justly. No language cou]d be plainer. It 
is a grand contrast to his evasive and, we fear, altogether 
misleading works. He did not intend this book for cir- 
culation amongst Protestants ; if he thought about the 
matter at all, he probably concluded that it never would 
fall into the hands of Protestants; but all the same, or all 
the more, it is the authorized teaching of Rome. 

There is one remark in a foot-note to this page of the 
catechism which is very sad to read. The writer is 
arguing that all these new doctrines are not new, 
that it is merely that the Pope or the Church says they 
must be believed now, as articles of faith ; but all the 
same that they were always believed. It is difficult to 
understand how a man of ordinary intelligence can be 
so deluded or so ignorant ; but so it is. The author 
then proceeds to give an example of how a doctrine that 
was always believed is at last declared (by the Church) 
to be true. He says (p. 123), '' The existence of God 
has always been an article of faith," and yet it was 
defined only a few years ago in the Vatican Council. 
So, according to the teaching of the Church of Rome, 
no one was obliged to believe in the existence of God 
until the '^Church '' said that he existed, and now that 
the Church has said so, it is an infallible truth, and 
stands on the same level as the infallible truth that the 
Pope is infallible. Further, this very catechism ^^roves 
what Rome has strenuously denied, that the new doctrine 
of the infallibility of the Pope was not declared by the 
unanimous consent of the Church. A great many 
Roman Catholic bishops, who saw that it was as absurd 
as it i^ false, were very unwilling to veto for it ^ iqv 



54 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

strango tosiiy, tho'.'gh Ilomo now teaches that the Pope 
was always personally infallible, the Pope had to get the 
Church to s:iy so before he (hire act u|K)n the doctrine, 
^lany Koniini Catholic bi8h()j)s, and 1 know some of 
them personally, refused to have anything to do with 
this new doctrine. They were afraid, however, of the pen- 
alties which lionic can so easily iiiilicton the » ontuniu- 
cious, and they made the excuse that it was not " oppor- 
tune " to proclaim the doctrine at the time; that is, not 
that the doctrine might not be true, but that even if \i 
were true, it was not a seasonable time to declare it to bo 
true. This made Pius IX. very angry, and he showed 
his anger even after he had got the bishoi)s assembled 
in Kome to proclaim him infallible. 

There were many in France and Germany who stout- 
ly resisted the doctrine, and refused to believe what 
the council had decreed ; to these, Pope Pius IX. ad- 
dressed a brief, dated Nov. G, 18 tG, in which ho 
said, '* The definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irre- 
formable of themselves, and are not in virtue of the 
consent of the Church." Again we may ask, for it is 
important, why did Pius IX. need the consent of the 
Cliurch to proclaim himself infallible if it was not nec- 
essiiry ? And yet he here states infallibly that it was not 
necessary. Then he adds that * it is still more absurd 
to say that we (the Romanists who refused to believe 
the doctrine after it was proclaimed) accept the defini- 
tion, and persist in saying tliat it is *inoi)portune.'" 
Now it will be noted that we have here, for I (juote from 
the sjime catechism (i)age 120), a statement, not of a 
Protestant, but of the very Pope liimself, that a consid- 
enible number of the Cerman priests and bishops 
objc^cted to this new doctrine, even nine years after it 



CONSEQUENCES OF INFALLIBILITY. 55 

had been promulgated, and that tlie Pope himself was 
obliged to publish a bull to compel their acceptance 
of it. So much for the boasted cry of Papal unity. 

I would advise Cardinal Gibbons respectfully to have 
this part of the catechism cut out before the issue of 
the next edition. There is another remarkable state- 
ment in this catechism. 

In the answer to a question, the learner is taught to 
say: *'The efficient cause of infallibility is the divine 
assistance promised to Peter, and in Peter to his suc- 
cessor, independent of the Church, which promise of 
our Lord was i]i the minds of some obscured for two 
hundred years." The meaning of this I do not pre- 
tend to explain. Certainly the Roman Church taught 
for a great many hundred years that the Church was 
infallible, and that it was to the Church that the prom- 
ise of infallibility was given. It is a new discovery that 
this infallibility was *^ promised to Peter and in {sic) 
Peter to his successors, independent of the Cliurch." 
We may ask, when and where was this ^^ promise^' 
made ? 

In the chapter on Tradition the following remark- 
able statement is made. It is said that there were 
thousands of Christians who, during 325 years (that is 
until the Council of Nice declared the Old and New 
Testament to be the Word of God), had no means 
of knowing how they Avere to be saved : ^' Thank God 
it was not necessary to have a Bible ; otherwise all 
would, inevitably, have been lost.'' 

A church that can teach in an authorized catechism 
for the young that we may thank God that it is not 
necessary to have the liible, is scarcely worthy of the 
name of a Christian church. As the present work is 



06 U'IfA r J^oMi: I I.ACllHS. 

intcmlcd for a simple inaiiiml of instruction, it will be 
impossible to enter bere into all tbo jKjints of contro- 
versy between Cbristian cburcbes who rely on Christ 
only for salvation, and the Churcli of Home which re- 
lies on man both in theory anil practice ; but there are 
a few points more connected with this claim of infalli- 
bility of such grave importance that we must notice 
them. 

This claim gives the Pope supreme and absolute au- 
thority over every human being on earth today. He 
may, accordingly, control you body and soul. It is 
taught, as I will presently show, that ho may extermi- 
nate the heretic ; and this means destruction of the soul 
as well iis the bod3\ The Pope has also a right to govern 
your country, to control your legislation, to dictate your 
policy and to regulate your literature ; in fact there is 
no subject whatever on which the Pope does not claim 
a right to control, and that actively. Not one jot or 
tittle of Papal claims has ever been abandoned ; they 
may be held in abeyance, but that is a very different 
matter. The Pope is waiting until you give him the 
power to do what he tells you frankly, if not brutally, 
he has a divine right to do. If you give him the 
power, you have only to blame yourself if he uses it to 
your hurt. 

If I dwell on the control which the Pope claims in 
l>olitical matters, it is because this is of far more im- 
portance than appears at first sight. It makes the 
\\)\w, for tin; time being, whether he is good or biul, 
weak or j>owerful, the absolute arbiter of the destinies 
of the whole human race. That the Pope claims a 
divine right to be such, wo see from the plainest dec- 
larationq of the liomau Catholic catccliism, 



CONSEQUENCES OF INFALLIBILITY. 57 

The temporal power of the Pope and his (divine) 
right to depose princes, and absolve their subjects from 
their allegiance, is very plainly stated. At page 195 
you will find a section headed : 

^' Popes deposing Sovereigns and interfering with 
Civil Governments." 

" St. Thomas Aquinas asks the question : 'Can the 
Pope deprive a sovereign of his temporal power if he 
becomes an apostate from the faith ? ' And he replies 
to this question as follows : ' When a sentence of ex- 
communication is judicially pronounced against a sov- 
ereign for apostasy, his sub-'ects are by the very fact 
free from all allegiance.^ " 

But there is yet more ; Cardinal Gibbons in this 
catechism teaches that '^ As the Church has a right 
to punish one of her members for wilful murder or 
adultery, so she has a right to punish a Catholic sov- 
ereign for abandoning the faith; she can dispossess him 
of his states if she judges this punishment useful for 
the good of her children " (page 195). 

Let us hear no more of the Church having changed ; 
here is the plain declaration of her right to punish, to 
use the temporal as well as the spiritual sword. Again 
I say that Rome only needs power to punish every Prot- 
estant nation for not being Catholic, and any Prot- 
estant nation which places power in the hands of Rome, 
knowing what her teaching is and what her practice has 
been, deserves a future retribution. In England to-day, 
with the help of a minister who ought to know Rome 
better, she is making political gains and steadily advanc- 
ing toward obtaining governing powers. In America, 
Rome already rules. 

But here ig another statement of his Eminence, for 



58 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

wimt he has so strongly approved may with justice be 
calleil his own declaration : 

" We must never confound right with fact. For 
certain reasons it may not be advisable for you to use 
your rielits ; but for all that your right is not less cer- 
tain. In the time of that apostate it was not advisable 
nor possible for the Church to use all her rights. She 
therefore allowed her children to obey that a]>08tate 
empeior in all that was not contrary to faith, in order 
to avoid a greater evil, but her moderation and pru- 
dence did not destroy or lessen iu the least any of her 
imprescriptible (sic) rights." 

Nothing could well be plainer than these statements 
made with the authority of so high a dignitary as Car- 
dinal Gibbons. 'J'he Church docs not use her temporal 
power to depose the Protestant rulers of nations to-day, 
simply because she cannot do so, but she does and she 
will use every eilort to obtain the power, and the first 
step is to secure temporal j)ower for the Pope. If the 
people of America like to provide the Pope with the 
fagots to burn their children, and the j)Ower to de- 
pose their presidents, it is surely their own affair. 
When Agag could no longer destiK)y the Israelites by 
fire or sword he came '* delicately " to Samuel and said : 
"Surely the bitterness of death is past." He would 
not destroy the Lord's people then because he had not 
the power to do so. Hut Samuel knew that he wanted 
the power only ; that his will was unchanged. The 
American people have before them the will of the 
Church of Home very plainly expressed ; they know 
that she has said, it may not be * :idvisable '* to use her 
rights, but the rights are none the less certain. 

Later the catechism says (p. *,*00)/*She (tlu* Church) is 



CONSEQUENCES OF INFALLIBILITY. 59 

bound to promote all good legislation and reprobate bad 
law-making ; to do this she must speak out, * meddle ' 
[the inverted commas are in the original], if you will, ' in 
politics/ " 

This is plain language. This is what is taught to 
Catholics with the authority of the Pope. But a very 
different story is told when some newspaper correspond- 
ent goes to a priest or bishop and asks him if the Church 
interferes in politics ; a torrent of righteous indignation 
is expended on the very idea that such a thing could be 
supp sed possible, while at that very moment perhaps 
despatches are arriving from Ireland telling how suc- 
cessfully the Irish bishops and priests are carrying out 
the instructions of their catechism in this respect. If 
Kome only would speak the truth, but she dare not ! 

Rome loudly cries out against you if you will not give 
her liberty to punish and persecute you ; to save your- 
self a momentary inconvenience you yield, and Rome 
rejoices and soon finds a pretext to compel you to yield 
a little more. 

Furthermore, every bishop in the Roman Catholic 
Church, at the most solemn moment of his consecration, 
takes an oath that he will, to the utmost of his power, 
persecute and destroy Protestants. The very words 
are : '* I will to the utmo:-t of my power persecute and 
attack all heretics, schismatics and rebels against the 
same our Lord (the Pope) or his aforesaid successors." 

Kow this oath is no private affair, the Latin original 
is contained in the ^' Pontificale Romanum," the book in 
which all the authorized ceremonies and oaths for the 
ordaining of a bishop of the Church of Rome are con- 
tained. Suppose for one moment that every Protestant 
minister took such an oath for the destruction of 



60 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

Ilomanists, what an outcry there would be I Is it not 
time for ProtesUiiits, rather I hIiouM my for Christians, 
to have a little courage for God, and to denounce these 
things as they deserve? But such is the power of 
Rome, tluit while she privately plots to destroy Protes- 
tantism, and declares every Protestant eternally damned, 
Protestiints are afraid even to discuss these terrible 
facts in public. Meetings may be held for the con- 
version of the Jews, or for the conversion of the Chinese, 
but not a word must be said of the conversion of 
Catholics, lest " the Church " should be offended. We 
see our brother fallen into a deep pit, but we must not 
try to draw him out, lest he should be displeased at 
our boldness. Tie may denounce us, and teach his 
ciiildren that we are accursed, as indeed he does, but we 
must be silent. When will Christians be aroused to 
the interests of Christ? When will they cease to bo 
ashamed to confess him before Romanists? To-day in 
America Protestant families dare not, or will not speak 
before their servants, because they are Romanists, of 
the grace of Christ and his Gospel, or censure those 
who disobey the gospel of truth, no matter liow kindly 
tlie words may be spoken. Rome rules the dining- 
room and the nursery, in the person of one poor ser- 
vant girl. No wonder that Rome is proud of a Church 
which has such power I 

Furthermore, Rome tells you plainly that you ought 
to be and would be if possiijle delivered over to the 
secular power controlle(J by Rome, to be executed, if 
you are not obe/Jient. Rome lias at ))resent only got so 
far lis to compel you to be silent about the doctrines 
which she teaches, or the evils which she does. This 
is a great gain, and Rome knows it. Scroeu every evil 



CONSEQUENCES OF INFALLIBILITY. 61 

deed, do not let in the light, and the fungus growth will 
be rank and rapid. You are keeping out the light 
through a mistaken charity, or through a pusillanimous 
fear. It matters little to Rome what is your motive, so 
as she obtains the desired result. You are afraid to 
come and hear a lecture or address from any one who 
has left the Church of Rome I You are afraid to sup- 
port a mission to the Roman Catholics ! But they are 
not afraid to tell in their missions, or to teach in then- 
catechisms, that eternal flames await you, and that if 
the Church had temporal power she would punish you 
in this world, as well as in the next. She teaches to- 
day in all Catholic seminaries, colleges and universities, 
through the "SummaTheologica" of Thomas Aquinas 
(vol. iv., p. 90): '^'^ Though heretics must not be toler- 
ated because they deserve it, we must bear with them, 
till by a second admonition they may be brought back 
to the faith of the Church. But those who, after a 
second admonition, remain obstinate to their errors, 
must not only be excommunicated, but they must be 
delivered to the secular power to be exterminated.'^ 

Here is one of the many reasons why Rome claims 
the right of temporal sovereignty. She needs the civil 
power to enable her to compel submission to her teach- 



CHAPTER ill. 

TnK KOMAN ( ATHOLir rilURCH TEACHES THAT ALL 

I'HOTESTANl-S WILL BE DAMNED, AND THAT 

PROTESTANTS HAVE NO RELIGION. 

It is very important for Protestants to know exactly 
wlmt Home tciiclies on tlie question of the salvation of 
those outsiclo of lier pale, for there is scarcely any sub- 
ject about which there has been so much deliberate 
deception. As I have said elsewhere, and it is no harm 
to repeat it, we must judge Home by her authorized 
teachings, and by them only. This is justice both to 
ourselves and to Rome. We have no right to take the 
mere word of any individual, whether Roman Catholic 
or Protestant, on such grave subjects, and we do not 
propose to do so. What Rome teaches is what she 
believes, and her teaching on this point is as plain as 
her teaching on the subject of infallibility. Indeed it 
is obvious that if Rome is the only infallible Church, 
she must be the only Church in which you can be 
saved. Every doctrine which the Roman Cliurch 
teaches is consistent and logical, if you once admit that 
she is infalHble, and that she is infallible by the au- 
thorization of God himself. 

Tliis is the reason why I have dwelt so much on this 
one point. To expose the errors of Rome on other 
jwinta is of little value, except in so far as by doing 
so you can loosen the hold which the doctrine of in- 
fallibility lui.s on the Tiiind of Romanists. I, knowing 



ROME'S TEACHINGS AS TO PROTESTANTS. 63 

what Romanists believe, and the grounds of their belief, 
and how mistaken Protestants often are in their mode 
of dealing with them, rather wonder that Romanists 
are ever converted. Errors which are very plain to 
you are not so to them, for you and they are looking 
at the matter from an entirely different standpoint. 
But if you understand their religion even on the one 
point of infallibility, with the help of God^s grace, 
which is indeed needed, you may make an impression 
and save souls. 

The doctrine of persecution, of punishment for 
heresy, the right which Rome claims to kill the body 
of the heretic, to prevent him from promulgating his 
*' heresy," is the direct outcome of the doctrine of in- 
fallibility. What could be more merciful than to pre- 
vent the spread of a deadly disease? Hence Rome, 
looking at heresy as a deadly spiritual disease, is pre- 
pared to kill the body in order also to kill the dis- 
eased soul. This is the teaching of Rome by which 
she vindicates the right which she claims to destroy 
Protestants. And let it be remembered that she claims 
the right now as much as she ever did in past 
ages. Plain language is best in such matters. It is the 
supreme duty of the Romanist to destroy the Protes- 
tant who will not submit to the Church which claims 
to have been founded by God, and endowed by him 
with the power to teach and to compel obedience. 
Happily for humanity, Rome cannot always carry out 
her teachings, but she does carry them out whenever 
she can. History proves that, even the history of to- 
day. In the face of Europe and her present crippled 
position, she cannot execute Francis Penzotti in Mexi- 
co, but she can imprison him an 1 let him languish in 



64 WHA T R OMF TEA ( 'HES. 

a loathsome dungeon, while the Pope in Rome and the 
cardinal in America talk platitudes about their love of 
libenil institutions. 'J'hey are indeed very much m 
love with Kuch institutions an 1 such liberality, and will 
continue so, until you enable them to throw off the 
mask. \\'\\y did not the Pope order the release of this 
good man? Why does not the Roman Catholic press 
in this country, which so much admires our liberal in- 
stitutions, demand his lelease? Why, I may ask, are 
Protest^mts so easily deceived ? Rome cannot at pres- 
ent close Protestant churches in this country, or im- 
prison Protestiint ministers, but she can control your 
liomes and oblige you to remain silent even in your 
own houses, when a servant girl of her creed is present. 
And to this intolerance American Christian women 
calmly submit. Their children will probably have to 
submit to silence even in their churches. To-day 
American Protestants are not allowed by the dominat- 
ing power to have addresses or lectures reported whicli 
ex})lain the teachings of Rome. The infidel may 
speak in public freely, the Socialist may deny Christ 
on the public platform ; but if one voice is lifted to 
say one word of expcr'cnce of Rome, so-called Christian 
men and women are afraid to come and listen, or to 
lielp such an undertaking for fear of Rome. Is this a 
free country or does the Inquisition rule it ? Practi- 
cally it is ruled by the Inquisition, when such things 
can be. 

But Rome is, I had almost siiid, gloriously consistent. 
Only yesterday a Romanist sjiid to nie, ** 1 am proud 
of belonging to a Church which, even when it has not 
full power in this country, has full political control and 
full social control. These women,'' he siiid, with a 



ROME'S TEACHINGS AS TO PROTESTANTS. C5 

contemptuous air, naming some Cliristian ladies of 
prominence in New York, '' must submit to our ser- 
vants and to our priests. They support all our institu- 
tions liberally ; but Avliat have they done for you ? 
They dare not help you to discuss our teachings." I 
must admit that he had reason and facts on his side, 
and I knew not what to answer. If I went to any 
Protestant in New York, as a Koman Catholic sister, 
to ask for help for charitable work, I was sure of a 
good reception ; when I went as a convert from Rome, 
I have been refused help. It is better to have facts 
plainly stated, and it needs some courage to state 
them. 

I now proceed to give proof as to the teaching of the 
Romanists on the subject of the damnation of every 
soul who is not a member of their Church, and I will 
also call attention to a point which should be noted, 
and which has not been noted : the Roman Catholic 
teaching that '^ Protestants have no religion." The 
effect of the teaching of the Roman Church on this 
•latter point is most serious. I had often heard, before 
I visited Europe, that Rome taught her Italian subjects 
that English people were all "infidels." I have found 
this to be literally true, when by personal contact with 
all classes in Italy I made inquiries on this point. The 
Italian peasant is as surely persuaded that every one 
who is not a Romanist, above all that English-speaking 
people, are not ^^ Christians," as he is that the sun 
shines. 'You see the tremendous leverage that all this 
affords to Rome. Why dare to listen to people who 
have no faith ; who do not believe in God ? 

It will be said that this is an exaggerated statement, 
that it cannot be true : yet this very doctrine is taught 



66 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

to-day anil is believed to-day in New York, by educated 
Romanists. ^ It is taught by Cardinal Gibbpus Hn the 
catechism wliich the Catliolic children in his Churcli 
are obliged to learn. Could there be better proof? 
It is believed to-day by educated people in New York, 
for I had an evidence of this myself yesterday in an 
interview with a Koman Catholic professional gentle- 
man of high standing, who holds an official position in 
tliis city, lie asked me how I could have left the 
only Church which has any religion. It was in vain I 
pointed out to him that Homo was the fertile mother 
of infidel nations ^ that wlierever Rome ruled the re- 
sult was that her own children turned against her and 
became infidels. lie looked amazed, but could not deny 
a fact patent to the whole world. Would that at least 
the Christian world would realize it. But still deep in his 
heart, as in the heart of every Romanist, was the one 
thought which he expressed : "If there is a God, the 
Church of Rome must be the true Church, because it 
is the only Church which has power : look how even 
Protestants support it and are afraid to oppose it."N 

The doctrine of the eternal damnation of Protestants 
is taught to the lisping child, and impressed with all 
the power of the Church's authority in later life ; 
hence the terror which besets the Romanist when he 
is even inclined to a momentary doubt as to any doc- 
trine of his Church, or when he sees, as he cannot fail 
to see, its evils. He is afraid to think, lest he should 
find what will oblige him to condemn. He will not 
run the chance of imperilling his salvation by leaving 
"the ('hurch." No one but a Romanist can have 
even an idea of the hold which Rome has u}>on lier 
j>eople through spiritual terror. No matter how ('4ire- 



ROME'S TEACHINGS AS TO PROTESTANTS. 67 

less or indifferent a man may be, there are moments in 
Ills life when he feels that he has a soul, that there is 
a future, and that he must do his best to secure happi- 
ness in that future. He does not like to run any risks. 
He has heard but little of Christ as a Saviour, but he 
has heard a great deal of the Church, and of Mary. 

A 3^oung Koman Catholic lady said to me once, ^'Is 
it possible that Christ can save you by himself?" 
The Romanist must approach Christ through the 
Church, and even then he must ask Mary to help him. 
I will give proof of this later. How is he then to dare 
forsake the only channel through which he can reach and 
satisfy an offended God ? Would to God that my words 
would bring a pla'ner understanding of the difficulties 
of Romanists to Christian minds, and rouse their sym- 
pathy and their active help. 

A Romanist who believes in the infallibility of the 
Church does not look to Christ to save him except 
through the medium of the Church; he must '^ hear 
the Church,^' by which he has been taught to under- 
stand the Church of Rome, and then he may come to 
Christ. A clear understanding on this point would 
save much useless and irritating controversy with Ro- 
manists. It is useless to say to them, ^^You do not 
believe in Christ," for they will tell you at once that 
they do believe in Christ ; but you must be prepared 
to reply, ^^ Yes, I know you believe in Christ, but you 
believe in Christ through the Church, and approach 
him through Mary ; now this is not what Christ him- 
self has taught.'^ It is no wonder that in this very 
catechism the writer ^'thanks God that the Bible is 
not necessary. " 

Here are the words of the catechism on the subject 



68 WHA T R OME TEA CHES. 

of the eternal ilrtinnation of all Protestants. There is 
a clmpttT dt'voti'd to the eubject (page 161). It is 
headcil : 

** Reasons why no Salvation is Possible Outside of the 
Itoman (sir) Catholics Church." 

This use of tlio word Uoman at once sweeps away 
any liopo that members of the Episcopal Churcli, 
which calls itself the ** Catholic Church," miglit find 
favor witl) Kome and come within the pale of salva^ 
tion. 

In this cha})ter we find the following question and 
answer : 

**Q. Must then nil who wish to be sjived die united 
to the Catholic C/hureh ? 

^' A. All those who wish to be saved must die united 
to the Catholic Church ; for out of her there is no 
salvation.'' 

It would occupy many pages to point out the illogi- 
cal absurdity, and I might almost say blasphemy, of 
this book, approved by Cardinal (Jibbons, and expressly 
])repared for the education of the cliildren taught in 
the parochial schools. The writer sUirts with the syl- 
logism that there is no siilvation outside of the Koman 
Catholic Church. He then proceeds to prove his 
major by his middle term, which runs thus : 

** Now Jesus Christ said to liis Apostles, and to all 
their lawful successors : * He that lieareth you heareth 
me, and he that despiseth you despiseth me, and he 
that despiseth me despiseth him, the heavenly Father, 
that sent me.' 

*nience all those who do not listen to Jesus Christ 
speaking to them through St. l*ete and the A]iostles 
in their lawful successors, des})ise (iod the Father : 
they do not do his will, and therefore heaven will 
never be theirs." 



ROME'S TEACHINGS AS TO PROTESTANTS, f.9 

We then find the following, which proves the second 
charge against Rome, which I have made in the heading 
of this chapter, namely, that she teaches plainly and 
emphatically that Protestants have no religion. 

*^ Q. Have Protestants any faith in Christ ? 

*' A. They never had. 

^^Q. Wliy not? 

'' A. Because there never lived such a Christ as they 
imagine and believe in. 

'* Q. In what kind of a Christ do they believe? 

^' A., in such a one of whom they can make a liar 
with impunity, whose doctrine they can interpret as 
they please, and who does not care whataman believes, 
provided he be an honest man before the public. 

*' Q. Will such a faith in such a Christ save Protes- 
tants ? 

"A. No sensible man will assert such an absurdity. 

'* Q. What will Christ say to them on the Day of 
Judgment ? 

" A. I know you not, because you never knew me. 

'■ Q. Are Protestants willing to confess their sins to 
a Catholic bishop or priest, who alone has power from 
Christ to forgive sins? * Whose sins you shall forgive, 
they are forgiven them.' 

*' A. No ; for they g nerally have an utter aversion 
to confession, and therefore their sins will not be for- 
given throughout all eternity. 

'' Q. What follows from this ? 

*' A. That they die in their sins, and are damned." 

The contents of this chapter should end, once for all, 
every doubt as to the teaching of the Church of Rome 
on this subject. The heading of the chapter allows of 
no second meaning ; the teaching is equally explicit. 
In the commencement of the chapter there is a cate- 
chetical dissertation on the subject of bad Catholics 
who fell from the Church : Luther, who founded the 



70 \yjIAT ROMK TKACHKS, 

Gernmii Liitlu'raiis; Henry N'lll., who foumlcd tho 
Kpiscojuil C'Mirrh — what a coinplinieut this hist to a 
Church which so often seems to iniiUitc the religion of 
those who so rudely denounce licr. Here we find the 
question : ** Wliut have these aposUite Catholics always 
been called?*' Answer: ''They have always been 
called Protestants, because they liave always protested 
against the Uonian Catholic Church/' 

Another matter to be noted in this catechism is tlie 
absolutely reckless manner in which the Bible is quoted, 
and in which words are put into the mouth of Christ 
himself which he never used. If Protestants took such 
liberties with the sacred text, what an outcry Romanists 
would make. Here is an example, and let the reader 
remember once more that those to wlium this catechism 
IS taught are bound to believe that these very words 
were uttered by Christ and that they have no means 
whatever of knowing how they are deceived. On the 
contrary, it would be a sin for them to suppose that they 
could bo misled by such persons as the Pope and Cardi- 
nal Gibbons. 



"Q. Is it not all the siime to God which religion a 
person professes ? 

''A. If it were all the siime to God which religion a 
person professes, God would not have forbidden in the 
first commandment to worship him in any other but 
the true religion ; nor would Christ have solemnly de- 
clared that * He who will not hear the Church, let 
him be to thee as the heathen and the publican/ 

*• Q. Who then will be saved ? 

** A. Christ has solemnly declared that only those 
will be saved, who having done God's will on earth m 
explained, not by private interjiretation. but by the in- 
fallible teaching of the Koman Catholic Church." 



ROME'S TEACHINGS AS TO PROTESTANTS. 71 

Now be it remembered that the child believes that 
these were the very words of Christ himself ; how then 
dare he even think that any Church could be safe, but 
the one which Christ has named as the only one which 
can teach him ? It would require far more space than 
can be given to this subject here, to enter into and ex- 
pose all the miserable subterfuges and fallacies of this 
remarkable production. Enough has been said and 
proved to show what Eome teaches to-day in this 
country. 

Apostasy, or the falling away from the *' true faith," 
is also declared to be an unpardonable sin, so that the 
young mind is terrified at even the possible danger of 
ieavnig a Church which Christ himself has founded. 
''Such persons are excommunicated, and can never 
enter heaven.'' So are the Free Masons by name (p. 
167) ; and in view of the repeated statements that Rome 
does not excommunicate those who send their children 
to the public schools, we may quote the following, 
which is given as one reason why Free Masons are 
especially excommunicated : 

It is '• because they are guilty of establishing public 
schools for the infidel education of youth/^ 

The writer then quotes from a bull of Pius IX., con- 
demning Protestantism in all its forms as ''the great 
revolt against God." 

Again, at page 174 the holy name of Jesus is used 
witr scandalous effrontery to prop up the figment of 
Papal supremacy ; the catechism says : 

" Jesus Christ has declared Peter and every successor 
{sic) to St. Peter — the Pope — to be his Vicar on earth,'' 
and then adds that Protestants deny this and call the 
Pope Antichrist. There are some concluding remarks 



72 WHA T Ji OM t: TEA CHKb. 

ut tliu close of this chapter wliich show tliat tlie liicts 
of history faro no better at the hand of tlio autliors 
tlian tlie words of Jesus Christ. The (juestion is asked, 
where tlie reference is clearly to Protestants : 

•* What else keeps many from becoming Catholics? 

** A. What kt'cps many from becomiiii^ Catholics is : 
they know very well that if they become Catholics thoy 
must lead honest and sober lives, be pure and check 
their sinful passions, and this they are unwilling to do.'' 

In view of the criminal statistics of every country or 
part of a country where the Koman Catholic religion 
is the predominating religion, this is a bold stiitiMiient. 
But what matter?^ It is intended for those who must 
swallow it, and who dare not dispute it, and have been 
so well taught not to reason or think that they simply 
believe it."*; I have often heard Romanists make this 
very assertion without having the least doubt of its 
veracity. > 

But there is another and still bolder statement ; 
there is a section of this catechism in which such sub- 
jects arc discussed as the Inquisition, the Crusades, the 
condemnation of Galileo, etc. In this the learner is 
told that *'the Catholic Church is indeed opposed to 
lieresy, but the only weapons which she uses to extirpate 
it are to explain her doctrine to all non-Catholics, and 
to be charitable and meek to them.'' Surely the 
writers must have forgotten that, a few pages previous, 
they declared that the Pope had power to excommuni- 
cate kings and sovereigns who were displeasing to him, 
and to excommunicate any one who did not obey him. 
The process of excommunication, even tis mitigated at 
the present day, can liardly be called *' charitable and 
meek." 

At page 196 we find tin- fol\()wing instance of tho 



ROMBTS TEACHINGS AS TO PROTESTANTS. T.i 

meekness of Rome : ^^ As the Clmrch has the right to 
punish one of her members for wilful murder or adul- 
tery, so she has the right to punish a Catholic sovereign 
for abandoning the faith." 

We may conclude this part of our subject with an 
oxfract from a leading authorized Roman Catholic 
paper, which shows what is the actual result of all this 
teaching. 

^ 77ie Catliolic Weekly, Albany, N. Y., says.* "Our 
career^ to enlighten Catholics of every nationality, 
and to defend the Church against every comer, no 
matter who or what he is. Wo are not, we humbly 
admit, endowed with that intellectual finesse that, like 
our friend's, can draw a hard ?nd fast line between the 
Church and the Pope, and put him on one side and the 
Church on the other. To our child-like and simple 
intellect both are the same." When the Pope speaks, 
I the Church speaks, and when the Church speaks, God 
( speaks. ^ We have been always trained to think in this 
^ old-fashioned groove, and now that we have grown to 
manhood we cannot shake it off. The Church would 
be in a sorry plight if it did not live in the Pope {sic). 
Like a football, it would be kicked about by every po- 
litical tyrant or intellectual crank. We do not even 
make the distinctions of the learned between infallible 
and non-infallible utterances. We are in such awe of 
his name, his office and his functions, that to us the 
least official of his pronouncements is freighted with 
the will and voice of God. 

" To betray him would be the basest of betrayals ; to 
be disloyal to him is a treachery, the blackest among 
men, to our thinking. Every other consideration is 
subservient to his authority and the welfare of the 
Church. What lies beyond this territory is secondary 
and incidental. Though we love our country dearly, 
we love our Church more, and the Pope more. We 
cannot recognize any aid which our country may give 



: I WHAT ROMH TK. I ( UF. '. 

118 to reacli heaven, and we do recognize that wo cauni.t 
rcacli that blessed goal without the Church and tlie 

l*0|H\'* 

What miserable, what unchristian words are these. v 

The Church would be in a sorry plight if it did not 

live in the Poix*. One marvels if the man who wrote 

these words ever read the Scriptures, whicli tell us that 

the joy and privilege of the Christian is to live in Christ. 



CHAPTER lY. 

THE PLAN^ OF SALVATION AS TAUGHT BY THE ROMAN 
CATHOLIC CHURCH. 

The Romau Catholic plan of salvation is simply 
this : that we must seek for salvation through the 
Church, and through the Church alone. In a work 
like the present, in which we must confine ourselves 
to the principal fallacies of Roman Catholic teaching, 
it is not possible to give all the information which we 
would wish, in the space iato which it must be com- 
pressed, but it is not necessary to go into details on 
subjects outside of the one main question. What shall 
I do to be saved ? The Holy Scriptures give us in- 
deed the one sublime and inspired answer : " Believe 
on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved " 
(Acts xvi. 13). The Roman Catholic Church says. 
Believe in the Roman Catholic Church, and you 
shall be saved. I often wish the Acts of the Apostles 
were more carefully studied by Christian people ; 
they are full of the Holy Ghost ; if we may use 
this expression more of one portion of Scripture 
than another. They give us the first history of the 
Christian Church. Every question of Church policy 
and practice finds here a record, an explanation and 
a decision. For myself, I can only say that this por- 
tion of Scripture is to me a mine of wealth, and an 
unceasing delight. Let us look, for example, at the 
history of Philip and the Eunuch. Look at the scene 



76 WHAT h'( }MK TEA CIIKS. 

in the jail at Philippi. Wliut can l)c gnmcU'r tlian that 
nmrvelloiis history ? Taiil and the tlevotetl Silas preach 
Christ, for they never preached Mary, and we can well 
picture to ourselves what would be their indignation, 
with their burning lo^e of the Master, if they entered a 
8o-C4illed Christian church, and heard the people cry 
out, as I have heard them, *' Sweet heart of Mary, 
be my salvation." Who, they would ask, is this new 
god, to whom these poor peo})le pray ? 

But let us return to Philippi. We are told how the 
Apostle and his companion were abiding in the city 
certain days. All the time their talk was of that dear 
Jesus whom Paul had once persecuted, and whom he 
now so dearly loved. Rut this talk did not please all 
the people. Some of them made money by divination, 
as, must we say it, the priests of Rome make money 
by masses for the dead, whi(,'h I will show later, from 
their own teaching, are useless. Paul drives out the 
evil spirit which has possessed the girl, and must be 
made to suffer for the good he has done ; yes, he suf- 
fers ; for a moment, it seems as if God had forsaken 
him, but it is only for a moment. The pains we suffer 
for doing good are the birth-throes which precede a 
glorious victory. 

The Apostles are thrown right into prison, and the 
jailer is charged to **keep them safely** (Acts xvi. 
23). Indeed he did his best, but they were in other 
keeping than his, though he knew it not. They were 
troublesome people, the magistrates said, and must be 
silenced. Kome, too, cries out loudly if any one dares 
to speak of her evil doings, or to expose, no matter how 
tenderly, her unchristian creed ; ami she would fain 
have such persons silenced also. As she cannot, yet, 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. Tl 

cast them into prison, she gets her work done by, alas, 
willing Protestant hands, and cries out for 'Miberty" 
and that she must not be criticised because it is unchari- 
table, and Protestants, either indifferent to Christ, or 
anxious to please the party in power, acquiesce, and 
the voices of those who expose evil in the interest 
of Christ are silenced. If the Apostles had acted as 
Christians do to-day, when would the world have heard 
the Gospel ? 

It is midnight in the prison ; but it is not midnight 
in the hearts of the Apostles. No, for Jesus is there, 
and where he is, it is always light. The Apostles are 
singing ; singing praises to God. They are glad — why 
should they not be ? — and they are shouting Christians 
and say so. The prisoners hear them. What sort 
of men, they say, are these, who shout and sing in 
very gladness of heart when they are thrust into a 
loathsome prison, and when they have been so sorely 
beaten that they can scarcely move their poor bod- 
ies. But their souls are not beaten. That is some- 
thing which no tyrant can reach. Presently the jailer 
comes; he has come to see what has caused all the com- 
motion. God has spoken : a terrible earthquake shakes 
the building, and penetrates down into the deep dun- 
geon. All the doors are opened, and all the prisoners 
are freed from their chains. Then, indeed, the jailer 
is alarmed ; he was alarmed first for his prisoners, he is 
now alarmed for himself. He knows that no mercy 
will be shown to him if his charge escape ; but Paul 
comforts him. The man in chains comforts the man 
who is free ; the man in disgrace has a word of cheer 
and helps the man who holds the post of authority. 
Oh marvel of Divine love ! Oh mystery of Divine power! 



79 W'HA T R OME TEA CITES, 

The keeper of tlie jjimsom dniws his sword to kill liini- 
8olf ; bettor to do tliis, he thinks, than to be put to 
torture by his masters, but Paul cries out to him : 
*' Do thyself no harm, for we are all here/' Oh 
blessed words I Oh joyous cry ! Do thyself no harm, 
we are all here, God is hero too ! Then comes the ques- 
tion of questions. The jailer no doubt had heard that 
Paul and Silas had come to preach a salvation which 
was new to him, and to others. Xow ho had seen and 
heard the mighty power of the Saviour of whom Paul 
had preached. The truth had como home to him ; 
blessed for us, if it lias come home to us also And he 
asks the question of questions, '* What must I do to be 
saved?" (Acts xvi. 30). 

Would to God that all our dear Koman Catholic 
brethren would ponder on the reply of the Apostle. 
Never was there a moment of more solemn imj)ort. 
Never was there a time when all the truth of the Gos- 
pel was demanded with j^^reater earnestness. Never 
was there a time when the Apostle was bound in a more 
solemn manner to tell this man the whole Gospel of 
Christ. What would be said if he kept back even one 
truth, or concealed one mystery. But Paul just 
preached what had been preached to him. Ilis preach- 
ing was as simple as it was sublime. '' Believe on the 
Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, thou and 
thy house" (Acts xvi. 31). 

Thus at the midnight hour began the most marvel- 
lous work of conversion, that work which is the work 
of works, before which all the works of man are as a 
vapor which passes, as a dream which is gone in the 
morning light. Believe in Christ, that is just all you 
have got to do. 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 79 

There was not one word about the *^ Church," for 
the Apostle never dreamed of such a Church as Rome 
has invented. The Church was everywhere. In every 
Christian household there was a Church, for the 
Church of Christ is not made up of popes, or priests, 
or bishops, but of God's own chosen people. Then 
the good jailer, regardless of all consequences to him- 
self, took the suffering Apostles and ' ' washed their 
stripes," doing his first act of Christian charity, and 
thinking of others first and for himself afterwards. 
This done, he was ready for more grace. There 
was no baptism in apostolic times, except believers' 
baptism. It was nececsary first to believe, and then 
to be baptized. There was no baptism of unconscious 
infants, who knew nothing of what was being done. 
Baptism is a Christian rite, and a believer's privilege ; 
and so this man was baptized when he believed, he 
and his whole house, says the Holy Scriptures, and he 
rejoiced. Well he might, fortius holy joy is a special 
grace which follows believers' baptism ; how can we 
help being full of joy when we have risen with Christ, 
whose life is our life ? 

Now I have dwelt on this narrative at some length, 
because I hope this book will fall into the hands of 
many Romanists, and they need only look at the 
Douay Bible, which their own Church authorizes, to 
see that I have stated the plain facts as they are con- 
tained in the Roman Catholic version of the Bible. 
Here is God's plan of salvation, as it is taught by the 
Apostles. But how very different it is from the Roman 
Catholic plan. We do not hear a word in this narra- 
tive about going to confession, or about the ''Church/' 
or about St. Peter's being the head of the Church. It 



M WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

is just beliove in Jesus and you are saved ; but it must 
not be supposed that if you believe in Jesus you can live 
an evil life. If you live an evil life you do not believe 
in Je:su8, for you do not koep his conuniiiulinents. 

It comes ill from the Homan Catholic Church to inti- 
mate, x\& we have already shown, that Protestants are 
unwilling to become Catholics, because they know, if 
they do so, they must lead good lives. It does not 
become them to abuse the liberty which they have hero 
to suggest such a thing in a work of instruction, the 
teachings of which must bo believed as a matter of 
faith. Yet if Protestants show the evil of this teaching 
they are scarcely allowed a hearing. Would to God 
that this work might be the means of arousing both 
Protestiints and Catholics to the consi*lenition of facts. 
It is a serious imputation upon the great body of Chris- 
tian people of this country which the following question 
and answer contain — a part of the teaching of those 
who are seeking still greater opportunites to teach. I 
quote from the third catechism which I have mentioned, 
at page 180, where the reference to Protestants is clear. 

" Q. What else keeps many from becoming Catholics ? 

** A. What keeps many from becoming Catholics is : 
tliey know very well if they become Catholics, thev 
must lead honest and sober lives, be pure, and check 
their sinful passions ; and this thev are unwilling to 
do." 

I have called attention to this question before, but it 
can scarcely be too much noted. The obvious unfair- 
ness of it, directed as it is toward a large body of Chris- 
tian jKJople ; and the advantage which is taken by those 
stiinding in th(^ position of teachers to create prejudice 
in the minds of youth and iiiiuj.cnce cannot hv too 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 81 

Strongly reprobated ; and certainly we need no furtlier 
examples of Rome's methods. The whole of the chap- 
ter from which this is quoted is equally calculated to 
mislead the young and confiding mind. 

And if we again say this is the authorized teaching 
of his Eminence Cardinal Gibbons, we must believe 
that he is prepared to abide by it. He cannot have 
one teaching for the Eoman Church, and another for 
the Protestant public. It is at least certain that what 
lie teaches under his solemn approbation is what he 
believes. 

It is too well known for contradiction, except where 
contradiction of even a falsehood is a crime, if the 
falsehood emanates from the Church, that Rome is the 
only Church in existence which does not require a 
good life as a condition of membership, so that we could 
almost afford to laugh at the sophistry ; but it is no 
laughing matter for those who are thus deceived to 
their eternal hurt. In this chapter we find also the 
following : 

" Q. Will those heretics be saved who are not guilty 
of the sin of heresy, and are faithful in living up to the 
dictates of their consciences ? 

'*A. Invincible ignorance or inculpable ignorance 
of the true religion excuses a heathen and a Protes- 
tant from the sin of heresy, but such ignorance has 
never been the means of salvation. From the fact 
that a person who lives up to the dictates of his con- 
science, and who cannot sin against the true religion 
on account of being invincibly ignorant of it, many have 
drawn the false conclusion that such a person is saved 
or is ill the state of sanctifying grace, making thus 
invincible ignorance a means of salvation or justifica- 
tion.'^ 



82 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

Now thisBtatemcnt is of tlie utmost importance, for it 
at onco knoi'ks the fuvorito argument of liberal Ro- 
man istii to pieces. Whenever a Protestimt siiys to a 
liberal Romanist — and, thank God, there are many 
such — that his Church teaches that every Protestant 
will be damned, he replies that Protestants who are in 
wliat Rome calls * invincible ignorance'' will not 
perish eternally. This is like the statement, so often 
repeated, that the Pope would never be made infallible. 
It answers a purpose. I do not doubt that many of 
those who Siiy this believe it ; but it is not the teach- 
ing of their Church, and this catechism jilainly says it 
is not. Nothing can be plainer tlian the words given 
above, and nothing can be stronger than the approba- 
tion given to this work, rather, I should say, the au- 
thority given to it by the Pope and Cardinal Gib- 
bons. The language, as he says, *' is remarkable for 
its clearness.*' It should be known that the Pope, as 
we have said elsewhere, has ordered the works of St. 
Thomas Aquinas to be the study of every Roman 
Catholic student ; and the compilers of this catechism, 
like good Catholics, call attention to the teaching of St. 
Thomas on this subject. The quotation is too long to 
give here, but I give the substance. 

It is simply this : that if any < ne, n nuitter whether 
heathen or Christian (I say Christian, though StThomas 
would not consider any one a Christian except a Roman- 
ist), was so good that he deserved it — had in fact lived up 
to the light of nature — God would send an angel to him 
to instruct him in the Catholic faith. As such an event 
hiis never yet luippencd, we may conclude of how little 
help this is for those outside the pale of Rome. The 
outcome, to use no circumlocution, is just this: that 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 83 

every human being, whetlier Protestant or heatlien, 
will be eternally damned, no matter how good his life 
may be, because he is not a Roman Catholic ; because 
he does not believe that the Church had power to hand 
over the infallibility which, as she says, God gave her, 
to the Pope ; and later we shall liave the Protestant and 
the heathen damned, because they will r,ot believe that 
the Pope should be the sole temporal ruler of the entire 
world, whether Christian or Pagan. 
The next question is : 

" Q. But is it not a very uncharitable doctrine to say 
that no one can be saved out of the Church ? 

*^ A. On the contrary, it is a very great act of charity 
to assert most emphatically that for no one out of the 
Catholic Church is salvation possible, for Jesus Christ 
^and his Apostles have taught this doctrine in very plain 
language. He who sincerely seeks the truth is glad to 
embrace it, in order to be saved." 

Here again is divinity made to vouch for a claim of 
distinctly human origin. It is all very well for the 
Protestant who has an open Bible to be told this, for 
he knows that there is no such doctrine in the Bible ; 
but the Romanist unacquainted with the Bible does 
not know how he is deceived, and may never know in 
this world. We then come to the point to which I have 
been leading up, that the Church is the medium of 
salvation for the Romanist. Rome complains very 
loudly if any one attempts to expose the inconsistencies 
of her teaching even in the most charitable manner ; 
but look at what she teaches about Christians. Pages 
of this work for the instruction of Romanists contain 
much plain language which is derogatory to the last 
degree to Christian people. I give a few examples, for 



84 U7/.4 T n OMK TEA CJIKS, 

it would bo impossiblo to do more ; but it is Tcry im- 
portiint tliiit Christiim people should know what their 
Kouuiii Catholic servants have been taught about them, 
what the oflicials of most of the great cities of America 
liave been taught, and what they are bound to believe 
under pain of being themselves considered lieretics, and 
damned with their rrotestjint fellow-citizens. 1 would 
also call attention to the fact that tliis doctrine, tliat 
every Christian who is not a member of the Churcli of 
Kome is predoomed to liell, is tlie ground on which 
Rome claims the right to persecute and to destroy the 
heretic. It is clear that lieretics are a moral pestilence 
in the sight of Kome ; that she is only following lier 
own principles and doing a duty which is most praise- 
worthy, if she rids the earth of such persons. Kome 
knows no ditference between the destruction of the. 
body and the destruction of the soul. The heretic is 
the destroyer of his own soul, and Ivonie is bound to 
see that he does not destroy the souls of others. Would 
to God that Christian people would realize what Rome 
is, and see how she is obliged by her own principles to 
persecute. All history has told that she does persecute 
when she has the much-craved temporal power to do so. 
Hero are two examples of the instruction which is 
given to children and to youth in this catechism in the 
parochial and in all Romanist schools and colleges. 

** Jesus Christ sjiys : *I sjiy to you that whosoever 
shall put away his wife, and shall marry another, com- 
mitteth adultery.' 'No.' says Luther and all Prot- 
estants (sic) to a married man ; * you may put away your 
wife, get a divorce, and marry another.'" 

What Romanist may not know that Rome permits the 
commission of wrong, if a sullicient sum of money is paid 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 85 

for the permission to commit it, as in the recent famous 
cnso of a nobleman, who was allowed to marry his own 
niece on payment of $50,000 to the Pope. The mat- 
ter was too public to admit of contradiction, and many 
such cases happen in private ; but it is here that the 
infallibility of the Pope comes in. The Catholic will 
be told that the Pope,being infallible in everything, has 
the power to allow whatever he thinks right, and you 
have no right to criticise his actions. Certainly, infal- 
libility is a very convenient doctrine for the Church. 

Accordmg to the teaching quoted above, it is plain 
that Protestants are only accused of sinning because 
they have not obtained a '^dispensation " or permission 
from the Pope to sin. Rome arrogatec to herself the 
power to abrogate the laws of God and to control the 
laws of man. It is a sin for a Protestant to commit cer- 
tain acts, but it is no sin for a Catholic, if he has (paid 
for) the permission of the Pope. 

Here is another example : ' ' Jesus Christ says to every 
man, ^ Thou shalt not steal.' 'No,' says Luther to 
secular princes, 'I give you the right to appropriate 
to yourselves the property of the Roman Catholic 
Church.' " The first Protestants are described in terms 
as glowing as they are misleading, as characters worthy 
only of the severest reproach. And this is the teaching 
of the politic Gibbons, who in his pulpit and m his pri- 
vate life appears to be such an admirer of Protestants I 
One marvels how inconsistency can go further. But 
there seemed so little chance that this, the real teach- 
ing of Rome, whould ever be brought before the world, 
that it was safe to tell the truth here and conceal it 
elsewhere. 

Martin Luther is held up for special reprobation, 
which is natural. Hen-y VIIL is held up also as the 



86 WlfAT ROME TEACHES, 

** first English Protestant, uiul the wicked founder of 
the Kpiscopul Church," which so fondly traces her suc- 
cession from Konie ; and thus is history falsified and 
manipulated for the purpose of exalting the Church. 
Unless the compilers of this catechism arc grossly igno- 
rant themselves, they must know this to be untrue. 
But can we suppose even by a stretch of charity 
that Cardinal Gibbons can claim this ignorance in 
excuse ? 

It will be observed, then, that the plan of the Roman 
Catholic Church in teaching her children is, first, 
to terrify them so that they will have the utmost 
dread of all people who are classed as " Protes- 
tants," or persons who fight against or protest against 
God's Church. In controversy with Rome we must 
never forget the persistence with which a Romanist 
has been taught that the Roman Church has been 
founded by Christ, that all other religions are the in- 
ventions of men. "We need to realize this strongly. 
It should teach us great patience with those who have 
been so cruelly deceived, and it shows just where the 
first great difficulty comes in. 'i'hey do not know that 
what Rome calls Protestantism is based on belief in 
the Holy Scripture, and that Rome is the Church of 
man. One acts on the principles of the Church which 
Christ founded, and the Church which alone can stand 
the test of Scripture ; the other is the Church of 
human inventions, and is one which dare not let itself 
be tested by Scripture. Protestants arc not all prac- 
tical Christians, but they at least permit an open 
Bible. 

I think the best way to (Milighten a Romanist is to 
call his attention to the changes made by his Church 



CA T HO Lie PLAN OF SAL VA Tl ON. 87 

ill doctrine, even in this present century. No one can 
deny it. Tlie proofs are given in previous pages of this 
work, so they need not be repeated here. Rome can 
only get out of the charge of having foisted a new doc- 
trine on the world by declaring that the doctrine was 
not new, but that it was always believed, though not 
declared as an article of faitlu> To this almost child- 
ish sophistry the answer is plain. If the doctrine of 
the Pope's personal infallibility was always believed, 
why was it necessary to have this council assembled to 
procla m it ? Why should it be now a question of 
a man's eternal salvation whether he believes it or 
not ? In the year 1869 any Catholic could believe that 
the Pope was not infallible without risk of eternal 
damnation, but he was bound to believe that the 
Church was infallible. After the year 1870 the same 
person would be eternally damned if he did not believe 
that the Pope was infallible, and that the Churcli had 
ceased to be infallible. Would to God that Romanists 
would consider the quagmire of absurdity into which 
they are led by the pretensions of Rome. It took the 
Church nearly nineteen hundred ^^ears to find out that 
the Pope was infallible. What a specimen of the 
wisdom of the '^ Church " ! Now it is taught that all 
the Popes who lived before the present Pope were 
equally infallible, though they did not know it ; but if 
so, what becomes of all the people who denied this, of 
I all the Romanists who never heard of such an article 
of faith ? 

Though the Roman Church practically ignores the 
Bible, still it has to make some show of decency in quot- 
ing from it. The one text which concerns St. Peter 
and the promises of our divine Lord to his Church is 



88 Mil AT liOMt: TKACHKS. 

mado to do duty for all the rest of the many texts 
which show just wluit was meant by the word church. 
It is indeed no wonder that Rome insists on interpret- 
ing the Bible for liersolf. 

But here is anotlier subject for consideration. It is 
c^ear that there cannot be two separate powers, or two 
e(|ual rulers, and in such a grave matter the absurdity 
and the impossibility of such a state of things is ob- 
vious. Botli the Pope and the Churcli cannot be in- 
fallible; if it were so, you would have two infallible 
powers, and who could tell which of the two to follow? 
But according to this new doctrine, the Pope and the 
Church were infallible in past ages, though they are 
not both infallible now. And it is to sucli absurd and 
self-contradictory teaching that the Church of Rome 
claims obedience. Surely there could not be a more 
serious warning as to the danger of departing from 
Scripture teaching. 

The Roman Catholic plan of salvation is. that wo 
can only be saved through the Church. If, as I have 
said, we can prove that Christ never authorized any 
such plan of salvation, then this argument falls to the 
ground. It is founded solely on the one text of 
Scripture, and Roman Catholics are taught that the 
*' Fathers " of the Church all believed the present 
Roman Catholic interpretiition of thij text. Now I 
give here extracts from some of the most eminent 
Fathers, who did not believe anytliing of the kind ; 
who, in fact, taught just the opposite. To these 
Fathers, trusting as they did in Christ for salvation, it 
would most certainly have been a subject of pain to 
liave it stated on tlieir authority, that they trusted in 
the Church. 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 8« 

Now we cannot interpret any document, above all a 
document of such importance as the Holy Scriptures, 
without comparing one passage with another. In other 
words, we must use Scripture to explain itself. Noth- 
ing could be more reasonable than this kind of inter- 
pretation. If we have any doubt as to the meaning of 
a certain passage in the Bible, all we have to do is to 
see what is said on the same subject in another part of 
the Bible. We often think that certain parts of Script- 
ure are difficult to understand, when there is no dif- 
ficuly, except that we ourselves have made it by 
wishing to interpret a certain passage or text according 
to our own preconceived ideas. TVe cannot blame the 
Romanist for doing this, for his Church tells him that 
he has no right to decide or investigate for himself. 
He must take the interpretation which the Church 
puts on the word of Scripture. How far-fetched or 
how false these interpretations are, we have shown ; but 
if our dear Roman Catholic brethren must decide, as ob- 
viously they must, to let the Church interpret for them, 
surely they should first understand very clearly what 
claim the Church has to such obedience. It is a seri- 
ous thing to place all our hopes of heaven on any per- 
son or on any theory. It is, in fact, almost the act of 
a lunatic, to take for granted that a certain statement, 
involving the most tremendous consequences, is true, 
without an^^ inquiry ; yet the great mass of Romanists 
take it for granted that the Roman Church is in- 
fallible merely because they were taught so when they 
were children. Will this excuse them in the sight of 
God from making inquiries for themselves when they 
come to years of discretion?^ And in order to make 
such inquiries they should have every facility for doing 



90 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

BO ; yet this is just wliat tlie Roman Catholic Churcli 
will not allow. You may listen to all the arguments 
and sUitements which the Church brings forward to 
prove her point, but you must not on any account hear 
or reason on the other side. (^ If Kome is so very sure that 
she is right, why is she so fearful of argument or in- 
quiry? Who would sign a deed binding him to a most 
important line of action without having first carefully 
studied the deed 'f It may be said that this would be 
necessary in temporal affairs, but not in spiritual 
things. The Scripture expressly sa3's that we are to 
** search the Scriptures/' and praises those who did so; 
why, then, should we not do what the Bible itself 
commands ? A good cause does not fear investigation. 
It is only when the title to an estate is doubtful that 
the lawyer ( bjects to inquiry. Why should you take 
it for granted that Rome is infallible ; above all, when 
she has changed her doctrine on this very point in the 
present century ? If after an investigation which sliall 
be a real investigation, you decide that Rome is the in- 
fallible Church, then you are justified in obeying it as 
infallible. But to do this without any investigation, 
and only because you were told so when you learned 
your catechism, this is not the act of a wise man, nor can 
you offer it in justification before God at the last day. 
Go<l may well say to you, ** Why did you not first make 
sure that Rome had tliis authority ? *' It is not mak- 
ing sure to take this or that for granted, and without 
the most careful inquiry. 

Now I have said that wo must interpret the Bible by 
the Bible. Rome says that what our Lord meant when 
lie said, *'Thou art Tcter; upon this rock will I build 
my Church/' was, that l*cter was the rock on which 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 91 

the Church was built ; but we find in anotlior part of 
the Bible that Christ was the rock (1 Cor. x. 4), and 
it is stated in such plain language that there can be no 
mistake about the matter. Therefore, unless we are 
determined to take a meaning which is not the Script- 
ure meaning of the text, we must believe that Christ is 
the rock, and that it was Peter's confession of Christ 
which was the foundation of the Church. Indeed the 
words are plain enough. There had been a discussion 
as to who Christ was. Our Lord asked his disciples, 
" But whom say ye that I am ? " (Matt, xviii. 15) . Peter, 
always impulsive and loving, replied at once : " Thou 
art the Christ, the Son of the living God." To this 
our Lord replied : " Thou art Peter, and upon this rock 
I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall 
not prevail against it. *' Now there are several points 
in this expression which explain our Lord's meaning, 
even if there was not other evidence. In the first place, 
if our Lord had intended to found the Church on 
Peter he would have said so. He simply says : " On 
this rock I will build my Church.^y Even the Roman 
Catholic translators of the Bible have not ventured to 
alter these plain words. Christ does not say I will 
build my Church on you, but on '^Hhis rock.'' The 
confession of Peter that Christ was the Son of God is 
the rock on which the Church is built, because it is the 
foundation doctrine of Christian truth. 

Even in the original Greek in which this gospel is 
written the meaning is far plainer, for the word rock 
which Christ used is feminine, while the name Peter is 
masculine. This fact sets the controversy at rest for- 
ever, but how are the uneducated to know what is care- 
fully concealed from them ? But there is quite suffi- 



08 WHAT ROME TEACHES, 

cient for the uiieilucateil in the plain words, whether 
tliey lire read in the Protestimt or the Homan Catholic 
tranBlation of the original Greek. Christ does not say 
he will build the Church on Peter, hut on *• this 
rock," Peter's confession ; and as for the expression 
"tlie gates of licll shall not prevail against it," most 
certainly thegatesof hell — the powers of evil — prevailed 
against Peter in a few short ho'rs afterwards ; for he not 
only denied his Master, but he even cursed and swore 
against him. What a specimen of an infallible Pope I 
There is one thing that Peter did, and would to God 
that those who claim to be his successors would imitate 
liis example— he went out and wept bitterly, repenting 
immediately and truly for his denial of his Lord. 

We have now to show from the Scriptures themselves 
how this passfige should be interpreted, for surely no 
one can deny that if we can find any statement in the 
Bible which shows what is meant by the ''rock" on 
which the Church is built, there can be no more con- 
troversy on the subject. We find just the very expla- 
nation needed in the Epistle of St. Paul to the Ephe- 
sians. Writing to his converts he says : "Now therefore 
ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow- 
citizens with the Siiints and of the household of God ; 
and are built upon the foundation of the apostles 
and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief 
corner-stone ; in whom all the building, fitly framed to- 
gether, growetli unto an holy temple in tlie Lord ; in 
whom ye also are builded together fur an habitation 
of God through the Spirit" (Eph. ii. 10-22). 

No words could be plainer than these. If St. Peter 
had been made head of the Church, or, to use the 
Koman Catholic word, Pope ; and if he had been the 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SAL 1 '.4 TION. 93 

rock on whicli the Church was built, most assuredly 
St. Paul would have said so ; but here is a plain contra- 
diction to this claim in the very words of the Bible itself 
and from the very pen of the great Apostle Paul. It is 
no wonder that Rome keeps the Scriptures so carefully 
from the people, and insists that she alone is authorized 
to explain it. If you give any one authority to explain 
the wording of a will, there is an end to all justice, for 
obviously the document will be explained in the interest 
of the party explaining it. It is a very simple way to 
end all controversy, but is it an honest way ? 

Jesus Christ is then himself the " rock " on which 
his Church is built, and it would be indeed a poor thing 
for the Church if it was built on any other foundation. 
And let it be noted, not only do we find that St. Paul 
never says a word about St. Peter's being the rock on 
whicli the Church was founded, but he joins the 
'^ prophets " with the Apostles as founders of the Church, 
as indeed they were. It seems almost unnecessary to 
say more. If St. Paul had preached this doctrine in the 
Roman Catholic Cliurch to-day, he would suffer a second 
martyrdom. If he knew — and he must have known 
it, if it had been revealed by Christ — that St. Peter 
was the head of the Church, and infallible also, what 
an injustice it would have been if he had concealed 
this great truth from those whom he was instructing. 
The fact is that the Apostles knew nothing whatever 
about this claim of Peter's supremacy, so it would have 
been difficult for them to have said anything about it. 
On the contrary, they took very short methods with 
Peter when he preached what they did not approve ; 
for they opposed and rejected him on one memorable 
occasion (Gal. ii. 11-14) : 



94 WHAT ROMK TEACHES. 

** Rut wl»en Tctor was come to Antioch, I witlistood 
liim to tho face, l)e(uiuse ho wjus to be blamed. 

*' For, before tliat certain came from .James, he did eat 
with thi* Gentiles : but when they were come, he witii- 
drew and si-paratcd himself, fearing them which were 
of the t ircumcisitwi. 

** And the other .lews dissembled likewise with him ; 
insomuch that Jiarnabas was carried away with their 
dissimulation. 

** Hut when 1 sjiw that they walked not uprightly ac- 
cording to the truth of the gospel, I said unto l*eter 
before them all. If tliou, benig a Jew, livest after 
tlie manner of tlie Gentiles, and not as do tlie Jews, 
why compellest thou the (Jentiles to live as do the 
Jews?" 

Surely this passage of Holy Scripture is quite suffi- 
cient to silence forevei- all claims of popes and prelates. 
Wlio could liave known better than St. Paul the pre- 
cise authority wliich St. Peter held in the Church ? And 
if tlie authority of St. Peter had been supreme and in- 
fallible, how would St. Paul have dared to blame him, 
or denounce him for his conduct to his' very face? 
Further we llnd that St. Paul plainly denounces those 
who claim any lieadship over the headship of Christ 
himself (Cor. i. 1*2, lo). Once more let it be said, it is 
no wonder that Pome forbids the reading of the Bible. 

Neither did St. Peter himself know anything of his 
own supposed infallibility, nor did he understand that 
he was the **rock" on which the Church was built. 
Surely we cannot go to better authority than to St. 
Peter liimself for the interprettition of a passage which 
lias only been made difficult because of the d'»termina- 
tion of those who had an end to gain by misinterpret- 
ing it. This is what St. Peter said himself on the sub- 
ject ; and again we quote God's own book, St. Peter 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 'J.j 

being ^'filled with the Holy Ghost," as the inspired 
writer dechires (Acts iv. 10-12) : 

''Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of 
Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth^ 
whom ye crucified, whom God Mised from the dead, 
even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. 

" This is the stone which was set at naught of you 
builders, which is become the head of the corner. 

''Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is 
none other name under heaven, given among men, 
whereby we must be saved. " 

Here, then, is the interpretation of St. Peter himself. 
Christ, he says, is the rock, the corner-stone on which 
the Church is built, and Peter too declares the way 
of salvation : " Neither is there any other name 
under heaven, given among men, whereby we must 
be saved." Most surely Peter would have denounced 
it as simple blasphemy if he had been told that 
a Church pretending to derive its authority from 
him would authorize and command its people to pray 
to Mary to save them in these words, used every day 
and millions of times a day by the Church of Eome, 
'' Sweet heart of Mary, be my salvation." No. He 
would have cried out against it with holy indignation. 
There is but one name to which we must look, but 
one Saviour in whom we must trust. Mary cannot be 
your "salvation." You dishonor Christ when you in- 
voke any other name but his. 

But even Peter himself tells us, and that also in his 
Epistle to the Romans, for he knew not of any Roman 
Catholic Church which should be above all churches. 
He who knew his Master's meaning never said, as those 
who claim to be his successors do to-day, " I am infal- 
lible; I am head of the Church. If you do not obey me, 



96 WHAT HOME TEACHES. 

I have power to cast jou, body and soul, into hell.*' 
Peter knew nothing of such doctrines, he knew only of 
the headship of Christ. Christ is, according to Peter, 
the corner stone on which the Church is founded, aiul 
most certainly Peter knew of no other. 

Hut we have now to see what is meant by the 
** Church." Do we find in Scripture that there wa< 
any special body to which the name of "* Church" 
was applied as a distinctive appellation more than to 
any other body of Christians ? I have in this expression 
ill fact implied an impossibility, but it is difficult to 
know how to make the matter clear to those to whom 
it has been made a subject of the utmost confusion. 
Again, we must obey the Divine command and search 
the Scriptures to understand what the Scriptures teach 
on this important subject. And certainly, if the Script- 
ures were searched patiently and with prayer, there 
would be very few points which remain unexplained. 
If we turn to the last book in the Bible, the Rev- 
elation of St. John the Divine — the writing of him 
who, it is believed, was nearer and dearer to our dear 
Lord than any of the other disciples — we find a full 
clearing up of any difficulty on the subject of the 
Church. St. John knew nothing of the Roman Catho- 
lic Church, or of any church, as having a pre-eminence 
over all other churches. If there had been any such 
supremacy or special authority given either to the 
Apostle Peter or to any church which was to be or had 
been founded by him, St. John would have been indeed 
guilty of a grievous sin if he had not declared it. ^ But 
must we not conclude that there never was in the lifc- 
lime of the Ai)ostles any hint of such a 8Upremac}7 for 
we tind that they at lea^st knew nothing of it, and never 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 97 

taught it, yet they were the divinely authorized teachers 
of the Church, and had their instruction from the very 
lips of Christ himself ? They had the giving of the Mas- 
ter's message to the people, how then could they have 
failed to give what would have been so important a part 
of his message ? If they knew that every one would be 
lost for all eternity who did not believe that St. Peter 
and all who succeeded him were infallible, as Kome 
teaches, what a fearful guilt would have been theirs 
for not saying so. 

^ But this doctrine was unknown to the Apostles, as all 
Scripture clearly proves.^ Let us then not dare to 
believe what they never taught, and what they never 
even imagined. 

But to return to the word church, a word of so much 
importance. We find that St. John knew nothing of a 
particular church which should rule all Christians, 
but that his idea of a church was simply a body of 
Christians living in a certain place, and worshipping 
together. Moreover, we say it reverently, God himself 
knew nothing of such a church, except in his Divine 
foreknowledge of the evils which should come to his 
people in later years, for we find that our Lord himself 
sent messages of reproof and commendation to seven 
different Christian bodies, each of which was addressed 
as ''the Church" which was in some place named. 
Here is the word of God (Rev. i. 10, 11) : 

" I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard 
behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, 

'' Saying, 1 am Alpha and Omega, the first and the 
last : and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it 
unto the seven churches which are in Asia ; unto Ephe- 
sus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto 



98 M'HA T ROME TEA CHES. 

Thyatira, and unto Sanlis. ami imlo Philadelphia, and 
unto Laodicea.'^ 

Now in these messages given ])y Christ himself we 
have the clear explanation of what is meant by the 
Church, of what God means by the Church, and woe 
to him who changes what God himself has said. The 
churches are simply the Christian people living and 
worshipping together in each town, as if we might say, 
the church in New York, the church in Philadelphia, 
and in fact, one of the churches is named by the 
divine Spirit the '^ church in Philadelphia." There 
is no Komaii Catholic Church, as the Uoman Catholic 
would call their Church to-day, in Philadelphia. See 
how very different this teaching of the Scriptures is 
from the teaching of the Church of Rome. At verse 
23 we find these words, which strengthen the argument, 
if it were necessary to do so. Our Lord says, *'A11 
the churches shall know that I am he wliich searches 
the reins and the heart ; and I will give unto you, every 
one of you, according to your works." Now plainer 
language could not be used . AVe find that our dear 
Ijord himself never founded a Church whicli was to 
rule all the other churches, but that on the contrary 
lie called all thedilTerent bodies of Christians churches, 
naming merely the place in which they lived. 

But it will be said, perhaps, that the Ai)ostles had a 
sixicial power to ** bind and loose," which must liave 
been transmitted to those who succeeded them. I would 
ask why must it have been transmitted to those who 
succeeded them when we do not find one word in the 
Bible about any such transmission ? In such an im- 
jwrtiuit matter the Holy Ghost could not have been 
silent. The Apostles were to preach the gospel to the 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 00 

whole world, and should luivc been informed of such 
an important matter, but there is not even one little 
hint on such a subject. 

Now, as } egards the text, here are the words (Matt, 
xvi. 18-19). These words were addressed to St. Peter : 

^' And I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and 
upon this rock I will build my Church : and the gates 
of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give 
unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven : and 
whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in 
heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth 
shall be loosed in heaven." 

But in chapter 18 of the very same Gospel the very 
same words are addressed to the ''disciples," and it is 
evident that by the disciples were meant all who were 
around Christ and listening to his instructions ; so 
there was no authority given to St. Peter which was 
^s^ecial to him. /In the 20th chapter of St. John, verse 
33, the very same power is given to all tlifi disciples after 
our Lord had risen from the dead. 'The question then 
is. What was this power ? We must again return to the 
wise and Scriptural method of interpreting Scripture 
by Scripture. There could be no better or wiser plan. 
We find first that Scripture is full of metaphors and 
allusions which were well understood when they were 
uttered, but while they are not now obscure they re- 
quire some explanation, f Our Lord calls himself the 
way, the door, and so on. Here we have the natural, 
familiar expression for authority in a household, the 
keys. We find the metaphor of the key used in Revela- 
tion and other places, over and over again, as simply 
a symbol of opening a place or location. Here we 
have the explanation of the keys of the kingdom of 



100 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

heaven. The A])08tle8 were the especial ojHjners of the 
kingdom of heaven b^* their preaching, and they were 

the first to open the doors of tlie kingdom by tlieir 
preaching. llenee tlie peculiar appropriateness of 
the words addressed to them by our divine Lord, but 
whatever may be the exact meaning there is no trace 
wluitever of this power or privilege having been con- 
ferred on any one else. 

There is another passage of Scripture which is much 
quoted by Konianists in support of tlieir theories, and 
this is the word, or rather the command, to ** hear the 
church." Here again the matter may be decided sim- 
})ly and most effectively by the same process of inter- 
preting Scripture by Scripture. We find in the Bible 
that the Church invariably means a body of be- 
lievers in Christ Jesus, and that there were as many 
"churches'' as there were places where Christian con- 
verts were to be found. We have shown that there were 
no less than seven churches in Asia especially mcnticned 
by name in Holy Scripture. Now not to go furtlier, 
for it is us.less to spend time on self-evident facts, we 
see that no one of these seven churches had any power 
or superiority over the other churches. There is no 
word of the supremacy of the Church of Home or of 
St. Peter. It is just the same in the Acts of the 
Apostles. The importance of the narrative of wliat 
was done in the early Church under the direct control 
of the Apostles who knew the mind of Christ is too 
obvious to need comment. 'The Koman Catholic 
Church, at its best or its worst, has not claimed 
to be greater than Peter.' (It is in fact bound by the 
actions and the opinions of Peter, the first infallible 
Pope ; and yet where do we find St. IVter claiming or 



CATHOLIC FLAN OF SALVATION. 101 

exercising any authority above the other Apostles ? 
On the contrary, we find that he was rebuked by them 
and subject to them» We see, then, that there was 
no such thing as a " Church," in the exchisive Koman 
Cathohc sense of the word, which we are bound to 
hear. The Church which we are bound to hear is the 
Church of the ever-living God, which exists now, as it 
did in the times of the Apostles, wherever there are 
Christian people. Some of these churches, like the 
churches described in the Book of Revelation, are 
more spiritual than others, and some are in decay, and 
almost lifeless. We are to hear what they teach, when 
their teaching corresponds with the teaching of Script- 
ure, and we find this very direction given by St Paul 
himself (Gal. i. 8). No words could be plainer ; yet 
Rome claims to have authority which St. Paul says no 
one has, not even '^ an angel from heaven." No one 
has authority to preach any other gospel than that 
which was preached by St. Paul. And most assuredly 
there is no mention in the gospel which he preached 
of any other way of salvation except that of going 
direct to Christ himself for pardon of sin. Nor is 
there one word of the peculiar method of salvation 
adopted by the Church of Rome in the Epistles of St. 
Peter, who never claims infallibility for himself nor for 
any successor. 

It is difficult to decide which to consider first of the 
many additions to the gospel of Christ which Rome has 
made. The re are so many things required by Rome to 
which the Scripture never alludes, and which most 
certainly were unknown to the Apostles, that all are 
qlike to be condemned, since they are not a part of the 
deposit of faith once delivered to the saints ; nor do we 



103 WHA T ROME TEA CHES. 

wish to make this book too lon«; for ordinary study ; 
koiicc we pass altogether by the question as to whether 
St. Peter ever visited Uome or not. It is a mere matter 
of interesting historical detail. The real question of 
importance is, whether St. Peter did or did not teach 
those doctrines which Kome teaches. The question is, 
Did St. Peter ever address such a prayer to the Virgin 
Mary as this which wo have already quoted, and we shall 
quote many others presently. Did St. Peter ever pray 
to the Virgin Mary as his *' salvation '' ? Surely even 
a Romanist must shrink with horror from such a sug- 
gestion. And yet the Pope to-day uses, as all good 
Komanists use, this prayer, and authorizes its use ; and 
what he does he says Peter does. Would St. Peter ever 
have taken money to say mass? Would St. Peter ever 
have said mass in the Roman Catholic sense of the 
word ? Would St. Peter have allowed nien to kneel 
down before him, and practically to worship him? 
That we know he would not have done, for we have 
proof how he abhorred any such worship. We read in 
the Acts of the Apostles just what Peter would have 
done if he lived to-day, for he could not change. Here 
is thd simple story of the manner in which lie acted 
when the kind of worshij) was offered to him which the 
Pope, who professes to be his successor, expects, and re- 
quires every day and from every one who approaches 
him. We read the history in the Acts of the Apostles. 
A certain good man, a Roman soldier, sent three 
men to St. Peter to ask him to go with them to Joppa, 
the city where the good soldier lived. St. Peter went. 
When Cornelius saw him, ho knelt down to worship 
liim. Here are the words of Scripture (Acts x. 25-26) : 
** And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 103 

and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him. But 
Peter took him up, saying, Stand up : I myself also am 
a man." 

Now observe the words of St. Peter, '^ Stand up : I 
myself also am a man. " No one should receive this kind 
of homage except God ; yet we see that the Pope does 
not follow the example of Peter, and that even priests 
and bishops require this homage to be paid to them as 
if they were more then men. 



CHAPTER V. 

TlIK I'LAN OK SALVATION AS TAUGHT IN THE ROMAN 
CATHOLIC CHURCH (CONTINUED). 

THE CONFESSIONAL. 

When onco the infallibility of the Church is taken 
for grunted — and it is merely taken for granted by tlio 
vast nuijority of Komanists, for they have no opi)ortunity 
of investigation afforded to them — all the rest comes as 
a matter of course. The plan of salvation is elaborate, 
and is daily being made more and more elaborate'. This 
is a fact very easy to prove. Every new doctrine which 
has been added to the articles of faith in the Church of 
Uome is an addition to the plan of salvation, because 
people are obliged to believe it or imperil their sal- 
vation. IIow different all this is from the plain and 
simple Gospel. In the present century the plan of 
salvation has had two notable additions to it. The 
first of these was the declaration that the Virgin Mary 
was conceived without sin ; the second wns that the 
Pope was personally infallible, and that all the past 
Popes, who knew nothing of such a doctrine, were also 
personally infallible. It is clear indeed that it was 
necessary to make all the })ast Popes infallible in order 
to be consistent. Now I have said these and many 
other things are additions to the original plan of sal- 
vation, even in the Church of Kome, and I can prove 
it. You caimot be stived now in this nineteenth cen- 
tury unless you believe now doctrines; hence it is very 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 105 

plain that they are additions to the plan of salvation, 
as in order to be saved you must believe them. Surely 
it ought to have been equally necessary for dead and 
gone Romanists to believe them, yet not only did they 
not believe them, but some of the most famous theolo- 
gians of the Roman Church positively wrote against 
them. The Popes who were living when they wrote 
were infallible, but neither they nor the Pope knew it. 
In the nineteenth century it is taught that the Virgin 
Mary was born without sin, yet for all the past cen- 
turies even the infallible Popes did not teach it, and 
Catholic theologians wrote learned treatises against the 
belief. After all. Catholics can never be sure of their 
religion, for it is changed so often, and that in the most 
serious matters. 

Now we go on to consider a few of the many things 
which Catholics are obliged to do, or believe, in order 
to be saved. They must believe in the Mass. They 
must believe, in direct contradiction to the very words 
of Christ himself, that they are not to receive his blood, 
but only his body. They are to believe that it is nec- 
essary to trust for salvation chiefly to Mary. I am well 
aware that this statement will be vehemently contra- 
dicted, but there is ample proof of what I assert, and 
I will bring forward this proof in due course. They 
are to believe that they will go to purgatory when they 
die, and that their getting out of purgatory and into 
heaven depends on prayers, masses and the power of 
the Virgin Mary. All this I will prove later. 

We now proceed to consider the Confessional, or, to 
use the correct Roman Catholic term, the Sacrament 
of Penance, as a means of salvation. It will be re- 
membered that I quoted on page 69 from the Roman 



106 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

Catholic Catechism to the effect that one of the spe- 
cial reasons why Protestants cannot be saved is, ** that 
they will not confess their sins." Now we must con- 
sider this doctrine of penance, not from our view of it, 
but from the teaching of the Church of Rome. I 
therefore begin with quoting from the catechisms 
already mentioned, and a})i)roved so specially by Car 
dinal Gibbons. In the " Catechism for Beginners" the 
matter is put quite simply : 

*' Q. What is the Sacrament of Penance '^ 
*' A. Penance is a sacrament in which the sins com- 
mitted after baptism are forgiven." 

Now to the Bible student this is at once contradictory 
to the teaching of our divine Lord, even m the sense 
in which the lionian Church understands confession. 
It must never be forgotten that Konian controversialists 
quote Scripture for those who are obliged to take what- 
ever interpretation the '' Churclr' is ple^vsed to put 
on what they quote, and who have no opportunity of 
knowing whether the quotations are correct or not. 
This latter is a very important point. I have alreatly 
shown the way in which Scripture is quoted with the 
authority of Cardinal Gibbons. I am very sure if any 
Protestant controversialists quoted the Bible as he 
quotes it, that he would denounce them with no ordi- 
nary indignation. Additions are made to texts of 
Scripture in such a way as to leave the reader to sup- 
pose that the additions are part of tiie text. 

The question of next importance is as follows : 

** Q, How do you know that the priest luis the power 
of absolving from the sins coinmitted after baptism ? 

'* A. Because Jesus Christ granted that power to the 
priests of his Church when he wiid, ' Keceive ye the 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 107 

Holy Ghost : wliose sins you forgive, they are forgiven 
them ; whose sins ye retain, they are retained/ " 

Now we have here again a specimen of the Jesuitical 
fashion in which Rome teaches the young. The child 
has been well impressed with the supposed truth that 
the Church is the Roman Catholic Church, and that 
no other ever existed, or is possible. Then there is the 
bold assertion that ''Jesus Christ granted this power 
to the priests of his Church.'' IIow is the child, or the 
ignorant adult, or even one who has been educated only 
in Catholic schools, to know how much suppression of 
truth there is in these few words ; and how very much 
of positive false statement ? Place yourself in the posi- 
tion of that child, reflect for a moment on the force of 
early impressions, and you will see at a glance how very 
difficult it is for a Roman Catholic to be undeceived. 

A whole chapter follows which treats of the different 
" kinds '' of sorrow which a person should have for sin. 
In this human scheme of salvation everything is elab- 
orated and pushed to the utmost limits of metaphysical 
ingenuity. Then comes the question as to the different 
kinds of contrition which you should have. How many 
a poor soul is driven to despair by all these human 
devices for salvation who would be filled with joy and 
peace if allowed to hear the plain and simple good news 
of the gospel of Christ. It is telling a lie to the Holy 
Ghost if a mortal sin is concealed in confession, and God 
help the poor soul who often cannot tell which sins are 
mortal and which are venial ! 

The result of all this examination of conscience and 
elaborate preparation for obtaining the forgiveness of sin 
is too often either entire disgust with religion, or insanity, 
or a miserable state of super-sensitiveness which is 



108 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

as great a torment to the priest as it is to the penitent. 
It will be observed here that it is made a sin against the 
Holy (thostifusin is concealed in confession. This 
claim of the priest to represent the Holy Ghost — to be, 
in fact, in the place of the Holy Ghost actually and 
really — is the source of the power of the priest in the 
confessional, and it is the means by uhich a wicked priest 
can easily accomplish his evil desires. It is but a few 
days since there was evidence of this in the public press. 
A woman with whom a priest had taken liberties actu- 
ally declared that she believed it was no liarm because 
it was done by a priest. I know that it is quite com- 
mon for uneducated Komanists to think that a priest, 
being in the place of God, cannot do wrong, and does 
not do it, even if the wrong of his conduct is self- 
evident. I do not say for a moment that the lioman 
Church teaches any such doctrine, but this is the 
practical result of what she docs teach, and certainly 
she is bound by the result of what she teaches ; but 
the poor Komanist, even after he has confessed to the 
priest as God, and has told all his sins, cannot yet bo 
sure that he is forgiven. In the first place there is 
tlie great (juestion on the subject of Intention. The 
priest may, or may not, have had the right kind uf 
Intention when ho has given him absolution ; but even 
if the priest has done his part well, the penitent may 
fail to obtain forgiveness because the priest may not bo 
a priest, and may not have had the power to give the 
absolution. We will show later that this no mere con- 
jecture or Protestant invention, but a well-founded 
possibility ; and what a terrible one it is for those who 
are tauglit to look to man for forgiveness ! Of God, if 
you come to him, you can be always sure ; some Koman- 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 109 

ists admit that it is quite possible the priest may fail to 
give you a true and valid forgiveness. 

But there is still more. Kome teaches that if you 
have perfect contrition — which is rare indeed — you will 
be forgiven even if you have been prevented by un- 
avoidable circumstances from going to confession. But 
there is another kind of contrition called ''attrition," 
which is simply sorrow for sin from fear, which is sup- 
posed to be the most common kind, and this kind of re- 
pentance or contrition will not save you, note it well, un- 
less you also go to confession. Such is the miserable men- 
tal and spiritual confusion of man's plan of salvation. 
As the vast majority of Romanists call for the priest on 
their death-beds, to get a chance of reconciliation with 
a God whom they are conscious in life of having of- 
fended, and as their motive is simply fear of coming 
judgment, they certainly have not the kind of contrition 
which, according to Rome, will save them. And as 
many of these unhappy sinners do not live till the ar- 
rival of the priest, they are as sure of hell as any Prot- 
estant. But when all has been accomplished, even in 
the most perfect manner, the poor sinner has by no 
means ended his efforts to obtain salvation. What is 
called ''satisfaction " has to be made, and penance has 
to be done. The finished work of Christ on the cross 
is ignored, and man has to try and save himself from 
the wrath to come. All this opens the door to the 
worst part of the Romish system of salvation. Rome 
teaches that the temporal punishment due to sin must be 
borne by the sinner either in this world or in the next, 
and here comes in the doctrine of Purgatory. 

Before taking up this subject, however, I will say a 
few words more on confession. There is abundant 



no WHAT ROME TEACHES, 

Roman Catholic evidence to prove that the practice of 
confessing privately to a priest was not known, and 
therefore was not pnictised, until the thirteenth century. 
Indeed we may say once more it is no wonder that 
Home demands the education, even in temporal things, 
of her people. If they got to know how they are de- 
ceived, Rome would soon have few believers. 

We read in the Acts of the Apostles that when Paul 
was preaching in Ephesus certain men who had been 
practising magical arts were converted, and that as a 
consequence of their conversion they confessed their 
sins publicly, and burned their books before all the 
people (Acts xix. 18). Now this is the only kind of 
confession which is mentioned or commended in the 
Holy Scriptures. When men have sinned publicly, 
and have given public scandal, it is their duty to con- 
fess before all men that they have sinned, and so to 
remedy at least some of the evil of which they have 
been the cause. But what a difference there is be- 
tween this and private confession to a priest! In the 
case of i)rivate confession to a priest there is every- 
thing to encourage and facilitate the continuance of 
evil. The priest is bound to secrecy, and the man or 
woman may go on sinning, if he or she pleases, and no 
one be the wiser. But if a public confession of sorrow 
for public sin is made, then indeed we may believe there 
is true repentance ; for the sinner is. as it were, bound 
before the whole world to reform. In the early ages 
of the Church this kind of confession was much prac- 
tised, and no doubt it was the origin of the modern i)rac- 
tice of private confession. But see liow entirely different 
were the circumstances. The early Church was mostly 
composed of men and women who had been idolaters, 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. Ill 

and who were converted from idolatry to Christ. Now 
amongst these were many persons who were sincere, 
but weak. Persecution raged, and these weak Chris- 
tians saved themselves at the expense of their con- 
science. It seemed to them such a little thing to burn 
incense for a few moments in honor of some pagan 
divinity when they might thereby save themselves from 
death and, what was harder to bear, from the most 
terrible torture. But when the time of peace came 
again and they desired to return to the Christian 
Church, it was necessary that they should show some 
public sign of repentance. They had fallen publicly, 
and had given scandal to every Christian who knew of 
their fall ; it was necessary that they should as publicly 
repent, and show that they had truly returned to 
Christ. 

Thus was the custom of public confession intro- 
duced. These people were obliged to do some kind of 
penance. At first there was no idea of anything beyond 
making a distinction between the Christian who had 
always remained faithful and the Christian who had 
fallen. But human nature lives in the best of us. It be- 
came some satisfaction to the good to make the fallen suf- 
fer, and the idea of inflicting suffering and bearing it 
as an atonement came into the Christian Church with 
many errors. Indeed the Apostles had predicted that 
such should be the case. St. Paul had predicted that 
after his death grievous wolves should come into the 
flock of Christ and devour it. It was an easy step from 
the simple placing of the repentant Christian at the 
door of the building where the Christians assembled to 
worship to make him do some far more severe pen- 
ance. Indeed it was quite necessary in the early 



1 1 2 WHA T R OME TEA CHES. 

Church that a distinction should be niiido between 
tliosc who had fallen and those who had remained 
steiidfjist, for jit any moment new persecutions might 
arise, and the weak men and women who liad once re- 
turned to their idols might not only do so again, but 
tliey might also betray their bretliren. 

Now let it be well noted that it was not until the Fourth 
Council of Lateran, which was held in the year 1215, 
that Kome made private confession of obligation. And 
what Uoman Catholic knows this important fact ? I am 
quite sure that the generality of Roman Catholics do 
not know this, nor would they be allowed to know it. 
But what kind of religion is it which is obliged to keep 
the people who belong to it in ignorance? The famous 
Koman Catholic historian, Fleury^ siiys that compul- 
sory oral confession was first established by Chrodeg- 
gang, ]5ishop of Metz, in the year TG3, for his monks. 
It is certainly a very convenient form of convent disci- 
pline, but no Roman Catholic was bound by the Church 
to confess his sins to a priest, or to any one, until the 
beginning of the thirteenth century ; so late are some 
oi the inventions of Rome, which her people fondly 
imagine are of apostolic origin. Let us now see, briefly, 
what is the position of the Roman Catholic who hopes 
to obtain siilvation through the i)riest. In the first 
place he is, as has been proved, very doubtful if the 
priest has the power to forgive him his sins. But even 
if he is sure that the priest has the power, he is still in 
a state of uncertainty. He does not know, and even 
the priest cannot tell him, whether he has the kind of 
contrition neceSvSiiry to obtain forgiveness. He is in 
terror, if he is at all scrupulous, as to whether he has 
8:iid his penance properly ; f'>r if he has not, here is an- 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. IKJ 

otlier liindrance to his obtaining forgiveness. And then 
comes the terrible purgatory which he must go through 
when lie dies. Instead of finding himself safe in tlie 
arms of Jesus when his last moment arrives, he is told 
to consider himself very fortunate if he finds himself in 
the torment of purgatory. No Protestant can tell the 
dread which every Romanist has of purgatory — a dread 
which is purposely fostered by the Church, so as to 
compel the poor sinner to spend money in masses for 
liis deliverance, or the deliverance of his friends. Thus 
come in all the evils of indulgences. He must get an 
^Mndulgence " to save him from the punishment which 
is so certain. AYhat will not men do to save themselves 
pain ? and what a cruelty it is to teach such a doc- 
trine, and extract from the poorest the last cent they 
possess, in the hope that they will suffer less in the 
next world. There are some things in the Roman 
Catholic system which should arouse the indignation of 
every honest man, and this system of buying immunity 
from future suffering is one of them. 

For myself, when I was a Romanist, I never had this 
fear of purgatory. I always said to myself, " Well, 
the Church teaches that I am certain to go to heaven 
some time or another. If I go to purgatory after my 
death, I do not care what I have to suffer if I get there 
in the end." But I know, from long years of personal 
and confidential intercourse with all classes of Roman 
Catholics, that dread of purgatory is the very bane of 
their existence, and that they will make any sacrifice to 
escape its punishment. And then how easy these sacri- 
fices are ! It is only to give a great deal of money to the 
priest here, and you obtain all that you desire hereafter. 
It is only to leave a large sum of money which you can 



114 WHAT HOME TEACHES. 

no longer use, to liave masses said for you after you are 
deatl, ami you may oscnpo all punishment. But the 
serious part of the matter is that the Church, with all 
her j>o\ver, cannot tell yon how much money you must 
pay for nuisses to escai)o purgatory ; ko that in your 
unoerUiinty you nuiy have to sufler, no matter what 
money you pay. Besides, this doctrine of '* intention '' 
leaves you in tlio most terrihle predicament. If the 
priest who sjiys the mass is not a priest — and, as will be 
seen later, only God can know whether ho is or not — 
you lose your money and you liave to bear the suffering 
all the same. I believe that the uncertiiinty about es- 
caping pain and this uncertainty about salvation is 
the direct cause of the devotion to the Virgin Mary, a 
subject of which we shall treat in the next chapter. 

I must now siiy a few words of the nature of these 
indulgences. Rome has been accused again and again 
of taking money and giving in return permission to 
commit sin, and she has expended a great deal of virtu- 
ous iiulignation on those who have accused her. But 
one moment's reflection ought to convince any intelli- 
gent Protestant that Rome is far too wise to do anything 
of this kind. She accomplishes her purpose, but be 
very sure that she accomplishes it witliout committing 
herself to anything that cannot be openly repudiated. 
Home most certainly tiikes money and permits sin in 
return, but she has her own way in carrying out the 
transaction. It would be far wiser for Protestants to 
find out Homo's way of doing business, and then to face 
her with it, than to make charges which Rome can 
easily refute, though they may be practically true. 

I have said often, and I say it again here, for I do 
not think it can be too often repeated, that Protestant 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 115 

honesty is no matcli for Roman Catholic duplicity. In 
the complicated and cumbersome system of the Church 
of Rome, chicanery and trickery are of absolute neces- 
sity. It is also of absolute necessity that Rome, like 
the spiritualistic medium, shall not allow you to look 
too closely into her proceedings. She is infallible, 
therefore you liave no right to investigate, for investi- 
gating is heresy, implying the possibility of doubt ; and 
to doubt is to be a heretic and insure your eternal con- 
demnation. 

The Council of Trent teaches that '' one person can 
make satisfaction to God for another." The Bible says 
exactly the reverse, but then you are not allowed to read 
the Bible, and you are bound to believe the Church, 
so that ends the matter. As a matter of common sense 
I do not see that there is any difference between buying 
something which will deliver you from the punishment 
of a sin, and paying something for the permission to sin. 
I can quote Roman Catholic authority to prove that in 
the mind of the ordinary Roman Catholic there is no 
difference.* 

Such is the miserable result of taking the salvation of 
the sinner out of the wounded hands of the God who 
died for him on the cross, and placing it in the hands 
of men who make it a shameless traffic. 

Rome says she does not sell indulgences ; but what 
is it but a sale, when money is given for them ? To give 
one example, and I could give hundreds such, we have 
the case of the nobleman, of which I have already spo- 
ken, who, within the last year, through the payment of 
fifty thousand dollars obtained the consent of the pres- 
ent Pope to marry his own niece. Even the Roman 

*See Appendix II. 



im WHAT ROME TKACHKS. 

Catholic pross in this country cried out in horror against 
this deed ; but those who did so were soon silenced. 
It is a crime to criticise the Pope. He is infallible in 
morals (be this well understood) us well tis in faith. 
He is practically the God of all the earth, before wliom 
all must bow, and who cannot do wrong. 

Hero is another Ciisu of sale of indulgences. The 
Rev. Mother of the Convent of Norwood, England, 
wanted to raise money for her institution. She pro- 
ceeded on the nsual plan, namely, to sell the grace of 
God for money. Now this expression may look harsh, 
but it is true. This is what the late Father Drumgoolo 
did for his Protectory ; and, as far as I know, the same 
sale of indulgences is carried on to-day by his successor. 
You pay a certain sum of money towards the support of 
an orphanage or a church, and, in return, you receive an 
** indulgence" of so many days, the barter being self- 
evident from the fact that, as in any other purchase, 
the more money you give the more value you get. 
So, even what Kome declares to be divine things are 
sought and sold openly and unrebuked. Moreover all 
this is done infallibly by an infallible Pope. In the 
case of the Norwood Orphanage, every subscriber of 
oneiX)und (^^.')) got an indulgence for a whole year, and 
every one who gave a donation of twenty pounds got an 
indulgence for his whole life. In fact, it is simply a 
policy to protect you against the pains of purgatory, 
and you can save yourself money by paying a lump sum. 
How infinitely sad all this is, and how absurd it would 
seem if it were not so wicked. Surely the Apostle Peter 
would have said in regard to such traffic in spiritual 
things, as he did to Simon Magus, " Thy money 
jx^rish with thee.'' Nor can it be denied that it is 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 117 

a traffic in spiritual things, for it claims to be a grace 
for the soul which is thus purchased, and it matters 
little whether the Church of Rome sells this '' spiritual " 
gift to help the living or the dead. 

There is no question, however, that indulgences were 
openly sold at one time which did a great deal more 
than remit the punishment for sin which had been com- 
mitted. The history of the interference of the German 
princes at the time of the Eeformation proves this. 
But enough has been said on this subject. It may be 
asked, If the Pope holds the key to all these wonderful 
indulgences, and to the treasury of the merits of the 
saints, which he dispenses so freely for a consideration, 
why does he not, like a good father, give them freely, at 
least to the poor who cannot afford to pay for them ? 
It is marvellous that Roman Catholics are not struck 
with the inconsistencies of the system in which they 
have such faith; but if we consider all the circumstances 
in which they are placed, it will be seen that they are 
at a terrible disadvantage. If a Catholic has even a 
passing doubt, it is a sin which he is obliged to confess 
to the priest without a moment's delay; the priest then 
uses every argument t j terrify him, and to prevent him 
from thinking. AVhy,. has he not been taught that the 
Church is infallible [I forgot ; I should now say the 
Pope], and how can he dare to put his opinion 
against the opinion of the Pope ? Then again there are 
men who never go to confession — indeed, the great 
majority of men never do — but they are, if possible, still 
greater slaves to Rome. They always expect to have 
the priest at the last moment to forgive them ; then, if 
they give him plenty of money to say masses for them, 
they will be all right. How can they venture to ques- 



1 1 ^ ]\'ir \T }:<) Mr tk \ ( 'IIES. 

lH»ii sucli an ca.-y aim satisiacLury religion? Sotliuyalso 
crusli at oiu'c tlio yliglitcst doubt, and the durkm ss of 
the shadow of death lies over this Church, and Uomo 
calls it unity ! 

Jubilees are another source of enormous income to 
the CImrcli of Konie, and an unfailing source of sin. 
At the Jubilee the Popes offer special indulgences — 
sometimes for money, and sometimes for works of 
piety — but who gave the Pope the '^key" to all tins 
wonderful treasure which he gives away so liberally ; 
and why does he not use his key at once, and give it 
all away to the poor and needy? 

There is one matter connected with the confessional 
on which I liave not touched. The (piestion of ques- 
tions is, first, Is this God's plan of salvation? Can sin 
be forgiven only by the priest ? If this is true, of 
course it follows that any evils which arise from 
the practice of confession must bo endured. But if 
the priest has claimed a power which belongs to God 
alone, can we be surprised if the most fearful evils 
arise from such an assumption of Divine authority? 
And, as a fact, we find that the confesi-ional has been 
a source of deadly evil, and is to this day. 

In preparing this book my great object has been to 
j)lace the doctrines of the Church uf Kome in the 
plainest form possible before both Protestants and 
lioman Catholics. It may seem a strange and doubt- 
ful assertion to say that both are often ecpiallj igno- 
rant of what Uomo teaches. Hence I have given in 
every case the very words in which the Church of Home 
teaches her doctrines, so that there can be no charge 
against me of false statements or misrepresentiition. 
To misrepresent under such crcumstances would be a 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 119 

grievous sin, and also a great mistake. Protestants do 
not understand clearly wliat. Rome teaches, because 
Rome has so mystified the simplest matters that they 
cannot understand what is really taught, and also be- 
cause they have been misled by adventurers who have 
lectured or written on this subject, though they were 
comparatively ignorant of the real teaching of Rome. 
These persons thought if any statement Avas made that 
was very much against the Church of Rjme it must 
therefore be true, and had neither the education nor 
the honesty to investigate before they made assertions. 
Roman Catholics, who are positively forbidden to 
reason or argue or even think about their religion, 
and who must believe just what they are told, are 
naturally ignorant, and I have often, been amazed my- 
self at the statements of Roman Catholics who were 
in other respects well informed. To give an example : 
There are few Romanists indeed who know that the 
Church of Rome declares solemnly that every Protestant 
will be eternally damned ; but we have already given 
proof that this is the plain teaching of Rome. The 
doctrine is so repulsive that Romanists may well be 
excused for doubting it when they hear of it. And 
there are thousands of unconscious Protestants in the 
Church of Rome to-day who do not believe this and 
many other doctrines of their Church, but this fact 
does not make the existence of these doctrines less true. 
It is true that Romanists have been taught this doc- 
trine when learning their catechism in their childhood, 
and that they have in consequence a general impression 
that all Protestants Avill be lost, but they are amazed 
all the same when the plain truth as to the teaching of 
their Church is put before them. 



1 20 WHA T K OME TEA CUES. 

So it is with I'rotestants who have beou deceived by 
false representations, and who imagine that Komc 
teaclies what slie docs not teach, or wlio take wrong 
views of what she does teach. It is not that there is 
less evil in liome, but that the evil is not understood. 
And this misunderstanding is no little gain to Rome, 
for it gives her an opi>ortunit}' of denying what is true ; 
hence it is my great desire to prove every point, and to 
make it as plain as possible, even at the risk of repeti- 
tion. 

Now it is commonly believed by many Protestants 
that the confessional is made use of by the priests for 
improper purposes. I shall never forget the indignant 
cry of a young Roman Catholic girl who was speaking 
to me of the violent and false statements made by a ])cr- 
son who hivs been a very fire-brand of hatred to Roman- 
ists, because of his repulsive and often false charges : 
''How could he say such evils of priests,'* she said, 
** when I so often got such good advice from them ; 
and they only tried all they could to help me to be 
good ? " 

It should not be forgotten that Rome has two faces ; 
one face is for Protestant countries where she dare not 
do evil ; the other face is for Mexico and such countries 
as she can control — and no doubt eventually she will 
do as she pletises in the United States. She keeps a 
comparatively sharp look-out after her priests here. 
They dare not openly sin against morality, such is the 
lK)wer of public opinion, and such is the grace of an 
open Hible. But in Mexico, for example, where the 
Bible is a forbidden book, and where a minister of the 
gospel can be and continue to be imprisonetl for 
reading the Bible, all the evils of Rome are enaotctl 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 121 

before the world. The world of Mexico has no public 
opinion enlightened by the gospel of Christ, hence 
deeds of evil are passed by without condemnation. 

I liave said that there are evils connected with the 
confessional which are misstated, and there are evils 
which exist. It by no means follows that an evil is 
proportioned to our idea of its enormity. We are 
shocked at public crimes of violence, but if the same 
crimes are committed privately we do not feel so much 
concerned. It is quite as great a crime to lead a poor 
ignorant person to believe that the priest can forgive 
his sins as it is for the priest to lead an innocent girl 
astray on the strength of his sacred character. In 
both cases the immortal soul is imperilled ; but one 
seems much more wicked to us than the other, because 
we have considered the subject from only one point of 
view. 

Protestants may be well assured that in this country 
priests will be very careful how they ask questions in 
the confessional which might be asked with impunity 
under other circumstances. Just as priests in this 
country would not dare to live with women openly, as 
they do in Mexico, and as they did in the early ages 
when the Koman Church legislated against it. But 
the tendency to both evils exists as a direct result of 
an unchristian system, and only needs the opportunity 
to break out. A clear understanding on this subject 
would save a great deal of misapprehension. The 
Roman Church teaches that in the confessional the 
priest sits as God and acts as God. It teaches that 
the priest cannot forgive sin unless he knows it in its 
minutest details. It can well be imagined what a hor- 
rible necessity there is for even the best priest to descend, 



\ 



132 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

into the deepest depths of the degruiling miseries of 
the liuman soul, und liow a demoralized i)riest might 
act ; iiiiy, how even a conscientious priest would be 
obliged to act. It follows of course that jiriests must 
have a vast literature of evil to guide them in under- 
Ftanding all the evil which they must meet; and such a 
literature they have, and are compelled to study. The 
demoralizing (ffect on their minds may well bo con- 
ceivel. A great deal has been sjiid about immoral lit- 
erature, but there is no literature so immoral jis that 
which the Koman (.'atholic student is compelled to 
study day after day, as a preparation for his min- 
istry. 

In this connection I must say :i word of warning as 
to the desire amongst a certain chuss of Protestants — I 
am afraid 1 might say Christian women — to become 
acquainted with these books, and to listen to addresses 
from persons who simply make a trade of such work. 
A woman who has fallen, unless she has very sincerely 
repented, will feel no degradation in speaking of these 
things in j)ublic', and may make it a source of immense 
income. But for Christian women such subjects should 
not bo named, much less spoken of openly, or, aa I have 
known it done, even before very young girls. It is 
(piite surticient for C hristian women to know that the 
priests liavo a literature of immorality which they are 
obliged to study ; to ask for detiiils is certainly not the 
j)art of those who desire i)urity, and places those who 
do so under the very same condemnation which they 
utter against the })riest. 

A great deal has been 8;iid of the safety of confession, 
and the relief it is to criminals to confess to some one. 
Now I believe that people very seldom confess with 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 123 

this end in view. Men especially confess because it is 
an easy means of making sure of heaven. No matter 
what their lives have been, if they " send for the priest" 
on their death-beds he will make it all right for them ; 
and poor human nature looks for safety everywhere 
but where God himself has placed it. The gospel 
scheme of salvation is too easy. Man wants to have a 
share in his own salvation, and will not trust to Ilim 
who alone can save him. 

In concluding this part of my subject I will give 
some extracts from the Book of Theological Instruction 
which forms the basis of all others used by Eomanist 
priests. There are some points in it which deserve 
special mention. 

The book from which I proceed to quote is no rare 
nor scarce work. It is the authorized Moral Theology 
of the Church of Rome, compiled and prepared for the 
use of Roman Catholic ecclesiastical students by Peter 
Dens. In this book the student is taught how to act 
in every possible case of conscience, in order that he 
may teach others. There is a chapter on the obliga- 
tion of the clergy to submit to the laws of the country 
in which they live, which should have been headed The 
Immunity of the Clergy from all Law, except the laws 
of the Church. It is amazing how easily Protestants are 
deceived by Rome on this and kindred subjects. They 
should remember that Rome considers that they have 
no rights, and indeed there are daily instances of how 
Rome acts on this principle in this country. 

Here is not only the teaching of Peter Dens, but the 
teaching of the greatest of modern Roman Canonists, 
the Jesuit Suarez : '^Because a layman has no author- 
ity over the persons of priests, therefore they are only 



\Zi WHAT HOME TEACHES. 

iiuliroctly obliged by the laws of the State." In fact a 
little reflection would show that the freedom of the 
•• Church '* from all dependence on the Stiite involves 
the freedom of every niuniber of tlie Church from all 
civil jurisdiction. And the Church plainly teaches and 
declares that the State is merely her servant to do her 
bldiling. It is only a question of power for her to 
compel the State to obey her. From this jx)wer of the 
Church two important obligations follow, as a necessary 
conse([uence. The Church having power over the 
State, can compel the State to act under her direction ; 
in fact she can do to the multitude what she does to 
the individual. She can compel the individual to re- 
frain from all discussion of the doctrines of the Church. 
This should be well noted. Kome cannot bear discus- 
sion. What kind of religion is it which cannot bear dis- 
cussion, even of the most friendly character ? Hence it 
is that those who employ Komanist servants will find 
often that, while they may listen to them at first wlien 
they begin to talk to them of Jesus, they will soon re- 
fuse to listen; and this will bo done by the command of 
the priest, who dare not allow his penitent to speak 
to any one on the subject of all others of the greatest 
importance to the human race. Kome cannot bear the 
light, nor permit her followers to enjoy it. 

Next folio WG the claim of Kome to comi)el the State 
to kill the Protestant or heretic ; for to Kome the 
names are \^\q same, and indicate the same condition 
of mind. 

This awful claim is simply the vested right of a 
Church which declares that there is no sidvation out- 
side her pale. Why should she not kill tlie Christian 
(heretic) whom she accuses of killing souls with the 



CATHOLIC PLAN OF SALVATION. 125 

poison of gospel liglit, as well as the poisoner who 
commits physical murder ? 

This power is very plainly claimed in this Book of 
Instruction for Priests, as we shall show later. 

The chapter " Concerning the Intercourse of the 
Faithful with Infidels '^ is well worthy of consideration. 
In this chapter there is a curious distinction made be- 
tween the Infidel (Christian) and the Jew, to the 
advantage of the Jew. In this chapter we find the 
following authorized teaching of Rome, which I am 
sure is as plain as the catechism which Cardinal 
Gibbons has so strongly approved for ^^ plainness of 
language." Here are the words: ^^It is forbidden 
to any lay person either publicly or privately to 
dispute concerning the Catholic faith ; and whoever 
shall do so shall be excommunicated.'^ Now it will 
be said that Catholics do sometimes discuss their 
religion with Protestants. This is true ; but it would 
be well to observe that they rarely do so unless they 
have some hope of converting the person with whom 
they are discussing, and in this case they would have 
had the leave of the priest. He would very carefully 
examine them in the confessional, and would at once 
compel them to silence if he feared that they were 
being in any way influenced against any doctrine of 
the Church. We find now that there are some who 
really are but nominal Romanists who are ready to 
discuss the conduct of the bishops and priests in this 
country. It is the first step in their emancipation 
from Rome, for this also is forbidden. 

In the next section the subject as to whether '' in- 
fidels " — and by the context this word is shown to in- 
clude, or rather indeed to apply exclusively to Chris- 



V2i\ WHAT HOME TEACHES. 

tians — may be allowed to worship God according to the 
dictates of their conscience. Here is the decision : 
** The religious services of pagans and lieretics are not 
to be tolerated, because tliey are so bad that no truth 
or advantiige for the good of the Church can be thence 
derived." Now the expression ** adv.intage for the 
good of the Cliurch '* deserves consideration. If it is 
for the good of the Church, any evil may be tolerated ; 
but it is quite certain that the individuals used for the 
advantiige of the Church will not be themselves bene- 
fited. It is said, later, that the Jewish worship may 
be tolerated ''with moderation ;" and the reason given 
is because the IJonianist religious ceremonies are so 
much like the Jewish that it may benefit the Catholic 
Church to point to them. Curious indeed : the Catho- 
lic may not search the Scriptures for evidence of the 
truth of the Church to which he belongs, but he may 
learn from the ceremonies of the Church which cruci- 
fied Jesus ! There is another reason, however, well 
known in history, why the Jews arc sometimes tol- 
erated. Tliey have been successful merchants, and 
their immense wealth has been a great source of reve- 
nue to the Catholic Church, which imposed fines of 
enormous sums of money on that hapless race for 
permission to live. Hence the toleration (always for 
a very liberal consideration) of the Jews. 

In the next chapter is discussed the question as to 
the punishment of heretics (Christians) by death, and 
the well-known passage is quoted from St. Thomas, 
on whose writings the present Pope has set the seal of 
his special approbation. The answer is a plain " Yes ;" 
for '* all heretics (Christians) who do not obey the Pope 
are justly punished with (Iciith," and in proof of the 



CATHOLIC FLAX OF SALVATION. 127 

divine approval of tliis, tlio text is quoted from Deut. 
xvii. 12. 

Now let us suppose for one moment that some 
Protestant college — say, for example, the Union Theo- 
logical Seminary of New York City, taught that it was 
the duty of every Protestant to compel every Roman 
Catholic to become a Protestant, and to punish him 
with death if he refused, what an outcry Rome would 
make. But if Protestants point to these teachings of 
the Church of Rome they are at once denounced as 
illiberal and unchristian. Is it not time that facts 
were better understood? It is not long since it was 
announced in the press that a Protestant gentleman in 
Minnesota had given 8500,000 to found a Roman 
Catholic college for priests. Did he know, or even sus- 
pect that it is only a question of time till these same 
priests will exercise the rights which they claim of 
killing every heretic, and if he has children they will 
not be spared ? Further, it is stated that the Church 
has the right to confiscate the property of heretics, 
and that they should not be allowed to hold '^any 
public offices or employments." This right of the 
Roman Church has been always claimed and exercised 
whenever the Churcli had sufficient temporal power to 
do so. But if Protestants ask even a fair share of 
representation for themselves, and place any limitation 
to the greed of the Romanist for office, they are at 
once denounced as unjust and illiberal In fact, the 
only ^' justice^' which will satisfy Rome is to allow her 
absolute power, both temporal and spiritual, and to 
place her in such a position as will enable her to 
deprive Christian people of all liberty, spiritual or 
temporal ; then indeed she will be content. Every 



128 U'llAr HOME TEACHER. 

concession to liomo is a step, and a step that can very 
seldom be retraced in this direction, and she knows it. 

I will conclude this part of my subject with some 
extniots from Uuinuii Catholic books, which will sliow 
the t<»Aching of the Koman Catholic Church on tlie sub- 
ject of lyiug and ecjui vocation. 

There are few Koman Catholic doctrines which have 
been made the subject of such fierce discussion as that 
of the permission to lie or equivocate ; yet the permis- 
sion is plainly given. The whole Koman Catholic 
system of salvation is certainly of the most curious char- 
acter. It is so evasive, so prolix, and so difficult to un- 
derstand without some practical knowledge of the work- 
ings of Rome, that it is no wonder that Protestants 
make mistakes. Of course Rome hotly declares that 
it is a horrible calumny on her Church to say that the 
permits lying, or even equivocation, and also she is very 
indignant when she is accused of worshipping the \'irgin 
Mary. Yet, if words mean anything, she is guilty of 
both charges. 

In this Book of Instruction for the Koman Catholic 
Student we find the following remark. It is an example 
of the way in which Rome deceives others, if she does 
not deceive herself. 

In Section 24:^ of this work ('* Dens' Moral Theol- 
ogy'') we find the plainest and most emphatic condem- 
nation ; so that Rome, if accused of permitting lying, 
can point to this triumphantly and siiy that she is 
calumniated, and naturally I'rotestnnts believe her. 

Section 244, however, treats of *' men till restriction," 
which is simply lying tis a fine art ; and in this section 
lying is distinctly permitted, and the student is told 
how to manage t<» li<' witli llu- lc:ist possible apjK>arance 



CA THOLIC PLAN OF SAL VA TION. 1 29 

of doing so. I give tlie exact words in the book. " John 
being in tlie market, and wishing to speak to Peter, 
asks Paul, Have you seen Peter ? Paul says, I liave 
not seen him, although he had seen him a few hours 
before." And this is given as a specimen of permissi- 
ble equivocation. Xow it is self-evident that this is 
lying, pure and simple. How easily a murderer might 
escape justice in this way. One who had been a wit- 
ness to the crime, and had seen the murderer fleeing 
from justice, might say that he had not seen him, if a 
short interval had elapsed between the time when he 
was asked the question and the flight of the murderer. 
In Section 243 the very words of Christ himself are 
used to defend lying. If, says the author (and the 
Church which has endorsed him), a question is asked 
or a matter stated which bears two interpretations or 
appears to do so, you may use the one which suits you 
best, even if it be a falsehood, because it is merely an 
equivocation. Then Father Dens quotes the words of 
Christ when conversing with the disciples going to 
Emmaus, when he asked them **what things, ^^ saying 
that our Lord spoke as if he did not know w^hat had 
happened, though he himself was the actor of the sad 
scenes of which they spoke. But how absurd is this, 
and how blasphemous. "What possible occasion could 
there be for equivocation in such a plain matter of fact ? 
But the poor Romanist who is obliged to take the in- 
terpretation of the Church must believe that these words 
of our divine Lord are a justification for equivocation. 
But Rome not only permits but requires^ on certain 
occasions, that her children should not only lie, but 
that even they should affirm their lie by an oath. One 
wonders that they have not quoted the example of Peter 



180 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

when lie denied Iuk Miister, to justify thisoutnigeon the 
divine law. 

In Section ir>9, which treats of the Seal of Confession, 
or the obligation wliich the priest is under of secrecy 
as regards what he hears in the confessional, the fol- 
lowing doctrine is laid down : ** What must a confessor 
rei)ly when lie is asked concerning anything which 
he has learned through sacramentiil confession alone? 
He must reply that he docs not know it ; and, if it is 
necessary, he must confirm the same with an oath/' 

Observe, the confessor is not told to refuse to tell on 
account of having heard it in the confessional ; he must 
simply swciir a lie. Such are the results of substitut- 
ing the ordinances of men for the commandments of 
God. Kome never hesitates to declare that the com- 
mands of the Church must be obeyed first, and the 
commandments of Cod after. But there is still more. 
Tiome indignantly denies to Protestiint controversialists 
or inquirers that she puts men in the place of God. 
liut here is proof that she does. The question is 
asked, if this false oath is not a lie? Tlie answer is 
**No; for though the confessor knows this of which 
he is asked as a God (sitting in the place of God in the 
confessional), he docs not know it as a man, and so can 
swear that he is in ignorance." What a tremendous 
assertion, and what a very plain statement of belief. 
You may lie under certain circumstances, if the Church 
requires you to do so. How easy to stretch such per- 
missions. And the priest takes the place of God in the 
confessional. On this very s:ime ])rincipk' thousiuids, 
I might siiy millions, of llonianists believe that the priest 
cannot sin, above all in the confessional, because he is 
there as God, and whatever God requires must be riglit. 



CHAPTER VI. 

SALVATIOX TiniOUGlI MARY. 

The title of tliis chapter may seem at first a severe 
charge against the Church of Rome ; but as I am pre- 
pared to prove that it is through Mary, principally if 
not exclusively, that the Romanist is taught to look for 
salvation, I believe that my choice of a title will prove 
but too correct. There is no charge against the 
Church of Rome -which that Church denies with greater 
indignation thai\ that of worshipping the Mother of 
Jesus. Ci-.dinal Gibbons has devoted a whole chapter 
in his ''Faith of Our Fathers/ to prove that the 
Church of Rome only '' honors " Mary, and that Trot- 
estants do not honor her ; that they do not even 
call her blessed, as Scripture does. Now one of these 
statements is as wrong as tlie other. Every Protestant 
honors and respects the \'irgin Mary, but they do not 
consider that it gives her honor to invoke her as their 
'^ salvation,"' when her divine Son has declared that 
he alone is our salvation. It is not honor, it is mock- 
ery, to place any person in a position which does not 
belong to him. AVe find in the Gospels, that Mary 
had so little supernatural knowledge of her Son when 
on earth, that she was for three days looking for him, 
and could not find him, yet now the Romanist prac- 
tically teaches that she has more power than he has. 
Again let me say that I will prove this grave assertion. 

But what is to be thouo-ht of the obvious unfairness 



189 WHA T ROME TEA CHE3. 

of one in the liighest position in tlio lioniun Catholic 
Church who never even liints at tlio devotions prac- 
tised by the uutliority of tlie Churcli wlicn lie is writ- 
ing liirgely, jis it is understood, fur rroti'stiints ? Such 
suppression of the truth on these most vitul subjects is 
:in jiboiniimtion to the Ix)rd, and us likely to diu.-eive 
readers us statements deliberately intended for that 
purpose. 

If it is true that Kome teaclies that Mary, as a medi- 
ator, Ciin obtain s;ilvation for the sinner, so far as she 
does this she displaces Christ. If Rome does not give 
Mary a share in the redem})tion of the human race 
she is unjustly accused and should be exoneiated. 
How is this point to be decided? 

I repeat again what I said in the beginning, it is 
not unjust to judge the tenets of a Church by those 
statements which it puts forth officially. If the 
Church of Rome has published any statement wliich 
gives to ^lary the place of a mediator between God and 
man, with the full and infallible authority of the Pope, 
then Komc proves herself guilty of idolatry of the worst 
kind. But Komc lias done this; she does it to-day, 
and she glories in doing it. 

Before I give proof of this I wish to C4ill attention to 
the diplomacy with which Rome covers much of the 
evil which exists in her creeds and in lier practice. If 
you ask any Romanist if Mary is put in tlie place of 
Clirist, still more if you accuse any Romanist of doing 
this, you will be met with an indignant denial. You 
will hear the oft-repeated statement that the Romanist 
only ^^asks the prayers of !Mary '' as he would ask the 
pniyers of any good j>erson. If this were all we might 
say, Why do you re([uire the prayers of Mary when you 



SALVATION THROUGH MARY. 183 

have Clirist, and liow can you prove that Mary can 
hear you ? A Romanist may say, We would ask any 
friend to pray for us ; Protestants ask the prayers of 
each other. But the question comes at once : Mary is 
dead ; liow do you know she can hear you ? What 
warrant have you for praying to the dead ? And here 
the Romanirft can only fall back on the authority of the 
Church, which is the basis of every evil. If the 
Church has authority to assure you that Mary can hear 
your prayers, it also has authority to tell you just to 
what extent she can help you. 

Here Rome must be met at once on the solid ground 
that the Church has no such authority, else you may 
be lost in a maze of useless argument as to the extent 
to which she practises Mariolatry. It is of the greatest 
importance that Protestants should understand very 
clearly just what the Roman Catholic Church teaches, 
and this is far more difficult than the ordinary Prot- 
estant supposes. Much useless controversy would be 
saved, and much triumph of evil would be prevented, 
if care were taken in controversy with Rome not to 
make accusations which, though they may seem correct, 
are capable of a very different interpretation when 
manipulated with the skill which Rome uses in her 
controversies, a skill which is too often sadly wanting 
ill honesty of purpose. 

In discussing the question of Roman Catholic '* de- 
votion " to Mary, they will lead you into a maze of sen- 
timental theory which may be very poetical and attrac- 
tive to human nature, but which is none the less very 
dangerous. This devotion to Mary is one of the most 
dangerous of all Roman Catholic doctrines, because it 
appeals to the best feelings of humanity, because it seems 



1B4 WIIA T nOME TEA CHES. 

sim])le ami coiniuinitivuly In nii let's to thoso who do not 
know what it really is. IIow fur from hurmless it is 
you may know if you will remember that it is the very 
first step taken in eonvent and parocliial schools to 
attract the young. There is a confraternity in the 
Roman Church called **Thc Children of Mary,'* tlie 
special object of which is to instil into the minds 
of the young that " devotion to ^fary " which is prac- 
tically worship of Mary as the one great means of 
salvation. 

In the catechism great care is taken to guard against 
any expression which might imply that anything is 
allowed in the Church of Kome beyond a simple in- 
vocation of Mary. It teaches that Rome only allows 
you to ask her to pray for you. In the catechism first 
we find this question and answer : 

'' Q. Is it wrong then for any one to siiy that Cath- 
olics by praying to the saints substitute thein fur Jesus 
Christ? 

*' A. The idea that Catholics by praying to the saints 
put them in the place of Jesus Christ is utterly false, be- 
cause Catholics do not ask the saints to grant them 
any graces, but to obtain them from God." 

Now if this were all, as I have Siiid, whi('h Rome 
taught authoritatively on the subject of the interces- 
sion of the saints, we could not accuse lier of direct 
idolatry. Rut this is far from being the plain teacliing 
of Rome. 

In the second or advanced catechism, we find a chap- 
ter on Indulgences, in which are the following question 
and answer : 

" Q. How does the Church by means of indulgences 
remit the temporal j)unishment due to sins? 



SALVATION THROUGH MARY. 135 

*'A. By applying to us the merits of Jesus Christ 
and tlie superabundant satisfactions of the blessed 
Virgin Mary and of the saints." 

Could words be plainer ? The merits of Jesus Christ 
must have added to them the ^' superabundant " satisfac- 
tions of Mary. Is this Christianity? Is this simply 
asking Mary for her prayers ? Is this treating Mary as 
a woman whose prayers, because she is good, may bene- 
fit ? No ; her superabundant satisfactions are required 
to be added to the merits of Christ for the salvation of 
the children of the Church. 

But here is another and far plainer statement of the 
necessity of obtaining the help of Mary in order to be 
saved. The Roman Catholic Church has instituted a 
devotion called the ''^ Devotion of the Scapular.*' The 
statements which I am about to make in regard to this 
devotion might well be questioned if I could not say that 
every one is taken from the authorized " Book of the 
Scapular '' now before me. It is a book which is in the 
hands of every devout Catholic who can read, and there 
is not a ^^ good Catholic " in America to-day who does 
not believe, and give practical proof of his belief, in this 
scheme of salvation through Mary. But all this is care- 
fully kept out of sight of Protestants. The scapular of 
the Virgin Mary is a piece of brown cloth which has 
strings attached to it so as to enable the wearer to keep 
it between the shoulders. On this piece of cloth pict- 
ures are fastened which represent Mary in all sorts 
of grotesque fashions. The wearing of this scap- 
ular was '' revealed to St. Simon Stock, on the 16th of 
July, 1251, by the Virgin Mary, who presented him 
with one and told him, among other things, that whoever 
shall be so happy as to die wearing this garment shall 



186 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

not Buffer in the flames of hell." What words could bo 
plainer ? Mary will savo the one who wears this scap- 
uhir. TluTo is not one word of the blood of Jesus 
Christ. In fact in the whole niirnitive Christ is abso- 
lutely ignored. 

Ihit this is not all. In the year 1522 Pope John 
AX 11. hatl* a vision of a similar character, and was 
assured by the Virgin Mary that she had made him Pope, 
and that, in return, she expected him to support her 
dignity and authorize this devotion. She also informed 
him that she, the *' glorious mother," would descend 
into purgatory on each Saturday and take out of the 
flames of torment those who wore this scapular when 
they were on earth,and take them to the ''mountain of 
eternal life." Now Pope after Pope has issued bulls, 
which are infallible according to the teaching of Home, in 
which they proclaim this doctrine of salvation through 
Mary. On March 3, 1522, Pope John XXII. pub- 
lished the bull in which he tells of this apparition of 
the Virgin Mary to himself, making it of obligiition on 
every Catholic to believe this. Alexander V., Clement 
VII., Pius V. and Gregory XIII. each oflicially declared 
their belief in this doctrine, so that it cannot be doubted 
by the faithful Catholic. But it may be siiid all this 
relates to the past. By no means. Once infallible, 
always infallible. No one can deny the doctrine thus 
proclaimed of salvation through Mary ; and no one is 
inclined to deny it, though it may be concealed from 
heretics. 

The book from which I have made these quotations 
and given the names of the Popes who have infallibly 
authorized this doctrine is published in New York, and 
bears the full episcopal approbation. Furthermore, 



SAL VATION THROUGH MARY. 137 

every good Catholic believes all this to-day as much as 
those who lived in the ages when these Popes set their 
seal to the truth of these things ; and every good 
Catholic to-day wears the scapular and expects Mary 
to save him if he wears it. It is not so long since the 
world at large had a proof of this, if only the world 
would heed what passes before it on such vital subjects. 
When the unhappy Dr. Cronin was murdered in 
Chicago, the men who did the foul deed stripped him 
naked, but they did not dare to touch the scapular, 
which remained round his neck, an evidence of his 
faith in Mary and their superstitious fear of offending 
her. Powerful, indeed, must have been this feeling 
for Mary which controlled those who did not hesitate 
to offend God by committing murder. 

When I was in Kome, some few years ago, the priests 
complained bitterly to me that they had lost their 
power over the people; that now they blasphemed 
Mary. It was of course wrong that they should pro- 
fane the name of God, but when they went so far as to 
blaspheme Mary then they were indeed past all hope. 
So completely evident was it that Mary held the first 
place in their respect. But as the subject is of so 
much importance I will say a few words more. In 
the Eoman Church no book can be published without 
the permission of a bishop. Lives of saints are 
especially subject to ecclestiastical scrutiny, so that 
any statement contained in them is, if not absolutely 
infallible, at least a fair proof of the belief which Eome 
desires to teach and impress on her subjects. In the 
life of a saint, Pather Champagnat, now before me, I 
find the following : '' When we see that so many 
Christians obtain salvation because they have been 



138 WHAT HOME TEACHES. 

faithful to 8jiy a little prayer to this powerful Virgin, 
liow could a brother be lost who daily recites her 
rosary ? " 

With one more proof that Rome inculcates salvation 
through Mary, not merely as a possibility but as a 
fact, I will add evidence which admitii of no disproof. 
There are certain prayers which are I'specially enjoined 
by the Catholic Church. In order to give an additional 
weight to the injunction, what is called an indulgence 
is grunted for reciting them. No indors^'ment could 
be higher or more authoritative. A book is published 
called the " Kacolta," in which all these prayers are 
found; but so ciireful is Kome th;it even the translation 
of these prayers is authorized. That is, the original 
prayers are composed in Latin, but for the benefit of 
those who do not understand L^tin they are trans- 
lated into English, and a guaranty is given that the 
indulgence applies to the reciting of the words in 
English as well ixs to the reciting in i^tin. I might 
quote many of these authorized prayers to show that 
Rome teaches her children to invoke Mary as a saviour. 
I will however give only one for the present ; many 
others will be found later. There is a special indul- 
gence for repeating this prayer, *' Sweet heart of Mary, 
be my salvation." While Kome professes that she 
does not teach that Mary is a saviour, she does so in 
fact, and in the very i)lainest language possible. In- 
deed it is no exaggeration to say Rome teaches 
that, while you may be s;ived by trusting in Christ, 
you will cvrlainhj be saved if you place the care of 
your salvation in the hands of Mary. 

The object of wearing the scapular is plainly stated ; 
it is to obtain salivation through Mary, and in thi^ 



SALVATION THROUGH MARY. Ibd 

nineteenth century this book is as fully approved and 
as strongly recommended by the Roman Catholic 
Church as it was in the dark ages. 

But there is another book, also approved and used 
to-day in New York, called the *' Glories of Mary," 
which, if possible, exceeds the Scapular Book in idola- 
try. A new edition of this book is before me now, 
published in New York, by the Excelsior Catholic 
Publishing House, 1891. Further, this edition has 
the following ecclesiastical approbation : 

"This new and improved translation of the 'Glories 
of Mary ' having been duly examined is hereby approved 
of. t JoHX, Archbishop of New York." 

When considering the extracts which I give from this 
book, remember that it has been '^ duly examined '' and 
after this examination "approved." Hence, no Cath- 
olic dare question or dispute any doctrine contained 
therein. 

Now if these two books which I notice here were 
merely books put forth by individuals, the case would 
be bad enough. Yet even then Eome holds so strong 
a grip on the souls of those whom she claims as her 
subjects that she would never even tolerate the circu- 
lation of books of devotion that she did not fully 
approve. We must remember how promptly she has 
recently suppressed the circulation of the Bible in 
France. But there is something far more than tolera- 
tion here, there is approbation, and approbation of the 
very highest character. And what is the teaching of 
these two books? Plainly and clearly — as plainly 
and as clearly as words can express it — Eome teaches 
that we must look to Mary for salvation. That our dear 
Lord is the angry judge, and that Mary is the merciful 



140 WHA T HOME TEA CUES. 

sjiviour. 1 Imvo before mo both the eilitiou of this work 
published in this country, and the edition pubhshed in 
England. There is no difference except in the greater 
literary fitness of one of the translators. In both 
translations almost the same words are used, the same 
sense is always expressed. Here is one extract which is 
sufficient for the i)resent, though the subject is so im- 
jjortant I intend to give others. In the preface to this 
work St. Alphonsus says, **Ood has ordained that all 
graces should come to us through the hands of Mary.'* 
When and where God ''ordained*' this, it need scarcely 
be said, is not stated. It is enough for the poor Roman 
Catholic that the ** Church" has authorized this — must 
we not say blasphemy ? — and that it has been uttered 
by a canonized Siiint. Indeed the authors of both the 
*' Book of the Scapular" and this book of the '* Glories 
of Mary '' are both canonized siiints, whose writings are 
approved by the Church, so that Home is bound twice 
over to then* doctrines. 

At page 389 we find the following: ''When the 
devil wishes to make himself master of a soul, he makes 
lier abandon devotion to the holy Mary. When this 
channel is closed she will at once lose the light and the 
fear of God, and finally eternal salvation." Could 
words be plainer ? Indeed I think the solution of the 
difficult question as to why among the criminal classes 
in our great cities there are found, alas, so many Roman 
Catholics, is that these poor people do not pray to God 
for grace, but only to Mary, who cannot give it to them, 
and BO they are without help in time of trial. But 
how awful IS the responsibility of those wlio teach such 
sinful doctrine, and who teach it in the name and 
claiming the authority of God. I now give another 



SALVATION THROUGH MARY. 141 

example to show that Mary is tauglit to the people to 
be abounding in mercy while Jesus acts as a stern 
judge. A vision is described which a '^ devout canon " 
saw in a church. Two thrones were erected, one for 
Jesus Christ and one for Mary. (Through the whole 
of this book Jesus and Mary are treated generally as 
equals in power ; the preference of authority, however, 
if any, being given to Mary.) A certain sinner was 
brought into the church that justice might be inflicted 
on him. This sinner was no less a person than a bishop, 
and a bishop with a curious history. He had been very 
devout to Mary when young, and she in return had got 
him made bishop. He proved ungrateful to his bene- 
factor, and finally was such a wicked bishop that he 
sinned ceaselessly and forgot to pray to Mary. One 
night when in the society of a ''wicked companion" 
he was warned by a voice that he had '' sinned enough ;" 
but he had still kept on in his evil course. The 
judge, Jesus, orders that the criminal should be 
brought forward and justice executed upon him. But, 
says the narrator, '^ Before the sentence was executed 
(see how great is the mercy of Mary), she, the kind 
Mother, that she might not be present at this tremen- 
dous act of justice, left the church." ["Glories of 
Mary," page 391, approved and authorized by John, 
Archbishop of New York, and published (new edi- 
tion) this year, 1891, in this city, and by his Eminence 
Cardinal Manning, London, England. Edition pub- 
lished in London.] 

At page 106 a story is told which is unsurpassed 
for absurdity and ignorance ; but this also must be be- 
lieved by the devout Catholic. 



142 WHAT HOME TEACHES. 

St. Bridget is said to have seen the death of her son 
in a vision. He had led a very bud life, but like the 
rest wius s;ived at the last moment, as the dissolute bish- 
op would have been if he hud continued his devotion to 
the Virgin Mary. St. Bridget saw in a vision — for this 
book is full of visions — the soul of her son before Christ, 
the judge, and the devil accusing Mary of having saved 
him because she " presented his soul to his judge, and 
thus had it saved without giving him (the devil) an 
opportunity to expose the reason why he claimed it as 
his own." 

This, in plain Knglish, means that Mary could de- 
ceis'e Jesus, and smuggle (we do not know any other 
word for it) a soul into heaven which was so wicked 
that it deserved hell ; and this is the doctrine of the 
lioman Church and its teaching, as approved by Popes 
and cardinals to-day. Yes, and Christian men and 
women will help by their influence, and even support 
by their money, institutions where this doctrine is 
taught to the young and ignorant, with all the authority 
of an infallible Church. God is a jealous God ; can 
Christian people expect that he will not hold them 
accountable ? You have an open Bible ; you are not in 
compulsory darkness as to the plan of salvation. Chris- 
tian men and women. Christian ministers, there arc all 
about you men and women who know no other way of 
sjilvation except through Mary, as this book })lainly 
shows. What will you do for them? Your country is 
full of misery through the conduct of men and women 
abandoned to habits of debauchery like this unhappy 
bishop, and ruined in temporal affairs througli thecuree 
of drink. To what religion do they belong ? Your pub- 
lic alTuirs arc largely administered by men who are a 



SAL VA TION THE O UQH MARY, 143 

disgrace to civilization, not to say to Christianity. lias 
it ever occurred to you that there is a close connection 
between their religious belief and their actions ? Why 
should they not make what they consider the best of 
both worlds? If they are quite sure — and they are 
sure, because their infallible Church teaches it to them 
— that if they are but ^^ devout to Mary," they will go 
to heaven, no matter how they live in this Avorld, why 
should they not do as they will ? But will not God 
judge you for your support of a system of iniquity ? 
You have no excuse, for you know what " Rome 
teaches," and you know what is the result of her teach- 
ing, for it is before you every day. 

It is stated distinctly in this book that Mary is a 
partner with Christ in the salvation of mankind ; no 
Scriptural authority is given for this assertion, but 
Scripture does not count in the teaching of the Roman 
Church. It is enough that the Church has spoken, 
and all men must believe. 

At page 189 we find this statement without any qual- 
ification whatsoever : ^^Xo one can be saved except 
through thee^' (Mary). St. John of Damascus did 
not hesitate to say, " Oh pure and immaculate queen, 
save me, deliver me from eternal damnation."' Yet we 
are told that the Roman Catholic Church does not in- 
voke Mary as a saviour ; if she does not, then the Eng- 
lish language has no meaning. But undoubtedly the 
worst feature in this devotion, as it is called, to Mary, 
is the strong assurances which are given by the Catholic 
Church, that salvation will be obtained at the last 
minute, no matter what kind -of life the person has 
lived, if only he has continued to invoke Mary by say- 
ing, ^'^only one Ilail Mary" every day. Surely, if ever 



1 14 1 1 'II A r liOMK TEA CIIKS, 

sinuing was made easy, it is by tliis arrangement. 
Again I give proofs, for mere assertion would be both 
foolish and unjust in such a case. Here are the exact 
wunls : '*A notorious rob))er lived in liic niuuntamsof 
Trent ; lie was advised by a religious to make a vow to 
f;u;t on Saturday, in honor of Mary, and on that day do 
no harm to any one. He made the vow, and Kept it. 
For six days in the week he lived as he pleased, but on 
the Saturday devoted to Mary he fasted, and did not 
rob or fight. He was executed for his crimes all the 
same, but after his death the Virgin ^lary came witli 
four angels, took up his body from the felon's grave, 
and carried it to the gate ot the city, and told the guards 
to tell the bishop that lie should give this man honor- 
able burial, for he was my faithful servant ; and this was 
done, and from this time all persons in that region be- 
gan to fast on Saturdays.'' No wonder, when certainty 
of salvation and permission to sin could be so easily 
combined. 

The above narrative is recorded at page GS9 ; at page 
C91 we find the following, which I have condensed : 
In Germany a criminal who was condemned to death 
refused the ministrations of the priest, who at last siiid, 
**Let us say a Hail Mary," when the man was at once 
converted. Not one word is there of the blood of 
Christ, or of Jesus, as the Saviour of sinners. In fact 
this is a religion of its own. In Spain, a man who had 
sold himself to the devil, who lived an evil life, and 
worst of all, *' had never been to confession," neverthe- 
less said a Hail Mary every day, and at the last moment 
of his wicked life the Virgin Mary appeared to him, 
and so changed him that he sent for a confessor. 

It is noteworthy in this book that the crimes and 



SALVATION THROUGH MAR V. 1 ir, 

criminal lives of priests are spoken of quite frankly ; 
in fact, the evil lives of the priests were a matter of 
notoriety at that time, when Rome, having absolute 
power, did not need to discipline her clergy, or to con- 
ceal their evil deeds. The same state of things exists 
at present in Mexico, where Rome has absolute power. 

At page 91 a story is told of a woman of Cologne 
who had sinned with an ecclesiastic. He committed, 
suicide, and she went into a convent. ^' Here the devil 
assailed her in bodily form, and she could not get 
deliverance from him till a companion told her to say a 
Hail Mary, when he fled.'' 

At page 703 a story is told of a sinful man who 
knelt at the foot of the cross and prayed in vain to 
Christ for pardon, but when he turned to the image of 
Mary he at once obtained what he desired. But of 
what use to say more ? Page after page is filled, with 
stories, all of which have the same moral — if you 
want to be saved hereafter, and to live a sinful life 
here, pray to Mary every day. One Hail Mary will do, 
and at the last moment you will be safe. What a 
difference between this and the religion of Christ, 
'' Go, and sin no more.'' The devotion of the scapular 
is also noticed in this book, and of course approved, 
and the statement authorized by the Pope reiterated : 
" Any one who wears this scapular at death shall be 
delivered from eternal flames." May God pity and 
lielp those poor souls who are trusting their eternal 
salvation to the wearing of a bit of cloth ! 

In this book, also, it is distinctly claimed that we 
are indebted for our salvation to Mary, as much 
as to Jesus. Practically it has been shown that 
Rome teaches her children to expect salvation from 



\U\ WHAT ROME TEACJIKS, 

Mary, and not from Jesus. PIxcuscs, apologies or c.\- 
j)laiiation8 may l)o made, hut tlio plain words are these ; 
and other liooks authorized hy the Moiiiaii ("liurch state 
j)reci8ely the same thin^^ 

At page 4.'J (*' Glories of Mary'') we find the follow- 
ing words : *' It is true that in dying for the 
redemption of the world Jesus wished to he alone ; 
hut when God saw the great desire of Mary to de- 
vote lierself also to the salvation of men, lie ordained 
that hy the sacrifice and offering of the life of this 
sjime Jesus she might co-operate with him in the 
work of our salvation, and thus hecome Mother 
of our souls." Could words he plainer? Not one 
word is said of when or how God made Mary ** co- 
operate in the work of our siilvation," hut it is clear 
that the Romanist, who must helieve whatever the 
Church teaches without any douht or examination, 
needs no higher authority for his confidence in Mary. 
According to Home there are two saviours, Jesus and 
Mary ; of the two we are most certain of salvation if 
we try to obtain it tlirough ^lary. In fact, according 
to this book, there is no comparison. Jesus may save 
us, but Mary certiiinly will, and on such easy terms 
that it is far safer to trust to her. Do I exaggerate? 
Have I not given sufiicient proof that it is the true 
teaching of Home ? And if so, what a subject for the 
prayers of Christian people who love their Master, and 
know that he, and he alone, can save us. 

I add here an extract from the tmnslation of this 
book, published in England ; the original is in Italian. 

It will be seen that there is little difference, as in- 
deed there could not be, both claiming to be faithful 
translations. 



SAL VA TION THR O UGH MAR Y. 1 47 

" It is the will of God tliiit jiU graces should come to 
us by the hand of Mary " (p. 3). 

" To honor the Queen of Angels is to gain eternal 
life" (p. C). 

"All who are saved are saved only by means of this 
divine Mother " (p. 8). 

"As many creatures as there are who serve God so 
many there are who serve Mary, for to thee (Mary) be- 
long dominion and power over all creatures" (p. 12). 

" The Eternal Father gave the office of Judge and 
Avenger to the Son, and that of showing mercy and 
relieving necessities to the Mother " (p. 14). 

" We believe that she opens the abyss of the mercy 
of God to whomsoever she wills, when she wills, and as 
she wills ; so that there is no sinner, however great, 
who is lost if Mary protects him " (p. 16). 

" Let us fly to thy feet, and always fly to the feet of 
this most sweet Queen, if we would be certain of sal- 
vation" (p. 19). 

" We can say of Mary that she has so loved us as to 
give her only-begotten Son for us, 7vhen she granted 
him permission to deliver himself up to death" (p. 
34). 

"Thou hast all power to change hearts ; take mine 
and change it "(p. 43). 

"My only hope, Mary, behold at thy feet a miser- 
able sinner. Thou art proclaimed and called by the 
whole Church, and by all the faithful, the refuge of 
sinners, thou hast to save we" (p. 60). 

" He falls and is lost who has not recourse to Mary" 
(p. 67). 

' ' God has placed the whole price of redemption in 
the hands of Mary that she may dispense it at will. " 
" Thou, Mary, art the i)roiyit\atory of the whole 
world " (p. 85). 

"Thou art the only advocate of sinners" (p. 95). 

" But now if God is angry with a sinner, and Mary 
takes him under her ^orotection, she withholds the 
avenging arm of her Son and saves him " (p. 98). 

" The only hope of sinners " (p. 102). 



148 M'lrAT nOMK TKAVHKS, 

'* I worsliip tliy holy licart, flinnnjh thee do I hope 
for salvation " (p. 10.')). 

**OfU)n we shall bo heard more quickly, aiul be tlius 

fireservetl, if we liave recourse to Mary, aiul call on her 
lolv name, than we should be if we called on the natnr 
of .)csus our Srtviour " (p. 1 VZ). 

** Many tliinjrs are asked from Go<l, and are not 
•granted : they are asked from Mary and are obtaitu'd. 
And how is this? It is because Ciod has thus dccrct-d 
to honor his Mother " (p 1 K5). 

*'To thee does it belon<,s wws St. Ronnvcnturc. lo 
siirc whomsoever tliou wdlcst to be saviHl, Oh then help 
me, my Queen ; my (^uetii snve me : O salvation of 
tlioRO wlio call upon thee, ilo thou saw me" (p. IIG) 

** In vain shall we seek Jesus, unh^ss we en«leavor to 
fi! d liim with Mary" (p. i:JS). 

'* A/ari/co-oj)era/ed in thf salvation of man "(p. 141). 

*' Marv was made the niediatrcss of our sa/ra/ion " 

(p. 1-^8): 

** The way of siilvation is open to none otherwise 
than through Marv." ''No one is saved but throuirh 
thee " (j). 14:5). 

*'Our salvation is in tlie hands of Maiy ; he who is 
protected by Mary will be saved ; he who is not, will be 
lost ; our salvation de})ends on thee " (p. 144). 

** There is no one, O most holy Mary, who can know 
God, but through thee '' (p 145). 

*' She is the wliole ground of my hope" (p. 175). 

*' Mary is the whole hope of our sidvation ' (p 14S). 

**All power is given to thee in lieaven and on earth, 
and nothing is impossible to thee'" {[). 154). 

*' Hv right she possesses the kingdom of her Sou " 
(p. -iU). 

** It is impossible for any sinner to be saved without 
the lielp and favor of the most blessed Virgin " (p. 11>7). 

'*Tiiou art omnipotent to sare gi)i)i€n<'' {\y. 251). 
The tike *' She effected our salvation %n coinmon irUh 
(;/trist" (p. 29:5). 

** We are all d'od's debtors, hut he is a debtor to titee " 
[Mary] (p. -5-). 



SA L VA Tl ON Tin: O I an MAR Y. 149 

" Thej-e /** no one saved but by thee ; no one who re- 
ceives a gift of God hit through thee^^ (p. 354). 

*• Moreover as she is the universal advocate of allmen, 
it is becoming that all who are saved should obtain sal- 
vation by her means" (p. 570). 

*• On- salvation is in her hajids " (p. 576). 

•'At the coMMAi^D OF Mary all obey, evej^ 
God " (p. 155), 



CHAPTER Ml 

THK MOKAL EFFECTS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC I'LAN 
OF SALVATION. 

And wliiit is the result of tliis system of siilvatiuii ? 
Let every ( atholic country answer. We need notliave 
recourse to arguments, wo need only point to facts. 
There is no country in the world where Konie has ruled, 
that she has not ruined, both morally and politically. 
It could not be otheiwise. An unchristian system 
must liave unchristian results. Kome is the graveyard 
of the hunum soul, for she will not allow the God wlio 
died for tlie soul to have even the first share in its 
salvation. The eternal silence of the tomb broods 
over her children, and hides the rottenness and corrup- 
tion which is within. Men who are taught that they 
can secure salvation by wearing a scapular, and by 
calling in a priest to hear their confession at the last 
moment of life, arc likely to take all the license of evil 
living to which they are inclined, and to make what 
they consider the best of both worlds. We know 
the state of the Italian colony wlio come to this coun- 
try from the very arms of Home. Why does not the 
Pope compel his clergy to teach these people instead 
of complaining as if they had been neglected by others? 
Why are not these unhappy pco])le taught even the 
commOTi rudiments of religion oreducatiuu by a Churcli 
which professes here to be so desirous of education? 



EFFECTS OF THE PLAN OF SALVATION. 151 

Rome must be judged,, us otliers should be judged, not 
by what she says, but by what she does. Rome must 
be judged as other institutions should be judged, not 
by her public professions but by the manner in which 
she acts when she has power. Not one word would 
be said of the ignorance of the Italian emigrant, 
nor would one effort be made to enlighten him, 
if Rome had not been shamed into it by fear of 
American public opinion. Rome is too often taken 
at her own valuation by Protestants, who are ac- 
customed to hear from Roman Catholic sources that 
all her clergy are learned, and that all her religious 
orders are fountains of benevolence. 

Yet even the very children of the Roman Church 
have risen up again and again to protest against the 
Church, which in the next breath they have called 
infallible. There are several reasons why Protestants 
do not take sufficient note of what is said from time to 
time, even by members of the Church of Rome, as to 
its moral, intellectual and religious failings. In the 
first place, so few dare to speak that their voices are 
hushed, almost before they are heard. It is strange, 
indeed, when a voice is uplifted to denounce the evils 
of Rome, from a source which should command special 
attention, that this attention is not given. But there 
is more than one reason which will account for this 
unfortunate state of things. In the first place, Prot- 
estants have been so often deceived by priests who 
have left the Church of Rome, and who have brought 
all the evil which they learned there with them, that 
they begin to mistrust every one who leaves them. 
Now this is wrong. Because some liave continued the 
disgraceful life they lived in a corrupt Church, it does 



162 WHAT HOME TEACHES. 

not follow that others are t'cjually discreditable. The 
good priests who Iiave left Home, and who arc to-day 

ministering in many Christian churches with grt'at joy 
to themselves, and with great benelit to the churches 
of which they are in charge, are overlooked, and any 
bad priest is held in everlastnig remembrance. Better 
to have been deceived by the bad than to have rejected 
the good, for in rejecting the good you not merely do 
them a grievous wrong, but you greatly discourage 
those who would leave Rome, if they were not fearful 
that they would have not only to meet with tlie jMjrse- 
cution of the Church they have left, but also with the 
indifference of Christian people. 

"We have here before us to-day in the United States 
the consequences which result when any conscientious 
priest dares to lift up his voice in even most respectful 
manner against known evils. A Protestant public may 
well be assured that if even one priest dares to sjKjak 
in defence of truth, he is the mouthpiece of many who 
will support him secretly. The case of Dr. McGlynn is 
sufficient evidence. It is not only the one who speaks 
who is indignant at evil which he is jx)werlessto reform ; 
others listen to his denunciations with an approval 
which they have not the courage to express. It must 
be remembered also that the power of the ecclesiastical 
superior to crush and punish in the most cruel manner 
anyone who differs from him, is an infliction of little less 
torture than the rack of the Inquisition. It is in fact 
the modern form of the ancient Inquisition. Or rather 
we should say it is the modern substitute for the In- 
(juisition which the Church uses until she has the tem- 
poral power to practise physical torture, and indeed 
the mentiil torture is scarcely less cruel than thepliysi- 



EFFECTS OF THE PLAN OF SALVATION. 153 

cal torture ; and the mental torture is freely applied in 
this so-called " free country." 

A McGlynn is cast out altogether, and the gentle and 
long-suffering Burtsell is put through a course of mental 
torture which is as cruel as the thumbscrew or the 
flames of the stake. Who will dare to speak with such 
examples before him ? Let not Protestants suppose for 
one moment that all the priests of this country acquiesce 
in or approve of existing evils. No ; but they are 
silent because they will not dare the consequences of 
speaking. In Italy the Jesuit Curci has spoken, and be 
assured has voiced the opinions of hundreds less cour- 
ageous than himself. A bishop even dared to express 
his opinion on the question of the temporal power of the 
Pope, but he too paid for his temerity. And these 
men have even to bear the pressure of Protestant ad- 
verse opinion, and they feel it keenly. They are 
taunted by the Protestant press with not being con- 
sistent Catholics, and with not obeying their superiors. 
They do obey, they never express an opinion against 
the doctrine of the Church. But that is not sufficient, 
they must not even express an opinion on any subject 
which is not indorsed by their bishop, for each bishop 
has come to be a Pope in his own diocese. 

And so the evils not only remain, but increase, for 
there are none to protest against them, or to expose them, 
and thus to secure a remedy. Even the press in this free 
country is now controlled, and must only give the pub- 
lic, whether Protestant or Roman Catholic, the side of 
any question approved by ecclesiastical authority. Free 
discussion is not permitted, and the next step will be 
to forbid discussion altogether, and to demand Protes- 
tant support in so doing. If this is attempted it will 



1 :>4 W HAT IH) ME TK. i CIIKS. 

iiol Imj one whit more oiitnigeous ihiiii wliut luui bueii 
done already. 

The Koman Catholic laity are phued in the same 
position as the priest. It is considered a sign of being 
a **bad Catholic *' if even the lightest criticism is ex- 
pressed on any subject which is contrary to the opinion 
of ecclesiastical superiors, no matter wliether the sub- 
ject is literary, political or social, and yet we are told 
that Konie does not enslave the mind. 

A Roman Catholic bishop dared to question in Komo 
itself tlie claims of the Pope to temi)oral sovereignty. 
But he Av:is crushed and silenced as an example to others. 
To obtiiin peace he was obligeil to apologize for having 
stated what he believed to be true, and for having vent- 
ured even in political matters to express an opinion dif- 
ferent from that which is held by the Pope. One more 
evidence, if such were needed, of the fact that the only 
liberty which Pome allows is the liberty to agree with 
her. And unhappily Protestant opinion, with rare ex- 
ceptions, sides with the Papal power in all such cases. 
Witness the case of Dr. McGlynn, who was denounced 
by the Protestant press of this country, even though it 
was well known that he had, and still has, the ardent 
support of many of his brethren in the ministry who 
would openly show their sympathy if they did not know 
too well what would be the penalty of their boldness. 

We speak of what we know, and of what we ourselves 
have been made to suiTer. We speak in behalf of many 
to day who dare not leave Home because they know 
that Protestant indifference will be their reward, and 
in many ciises ProtesUmt opposition. How will Chris- 
tians answer to (Jod at the last day for all this, for their 
indifference to the souls who are perishing around 



EFFECTS OF THE PLAN OF SA L I \ 1 77 ON. 1 T).-) 

them ? Protestants are to-day forging the fetters which 
will soon chain their own children, and they may rest 
well assured that Kome will be none the more lenient 
to them for their liberality to lier. 

I wish that Christian people would ask themselves 
sometimes if they are not ashamed of Jesus. Are 
they not ashamed of Jesus when they give any sup- 
port or countenance to a religion which, as we have 
shown, places Jesus second to Mary as a Saviour ? Is 
there not sufficient proof of this grave charge in the 
present volume ? If, then, knowing these things, you 
encourage or support those who teach them, are you 
not really ashamed of Jesus ? For you will not bear 
testimony for him by condemning what he abhors. It 
is very easy to stand up in church surrounded by a 
sympathizing crowd and give our testimony for the 
Lord. But what of giving this testimony where we are 
sure that it will not meet with approval ? The idle 
excuse that we must not ^'antagonize" Catholics is 
just an excuse and nothing more. It is an excuse that 
most surely Christ will not accept at the day when no 
excuses will avail. Bearing a calm, holy testimony for 
Christ is not '^ antagonizing '^ those from whom we 
differ, and if it is considered such, it is our duty to use 
this antagonism. Let me ask, Have you ever yet given 
testimony for Jesus, when by so doing you have had to 
bear the least reproach ? Have you ever yet been 
" made a gazing stock both by reproaches and afflic- 
tions," or have you ever made yourself " companions 
of those who were so used '' ? 

It is very easy to admire the heroic courage of the 
martyrs at a safe distance, but what of bearing ourselves 
a touch of the martyr's pain ? Have we ever borne even 



1 .0 WHAT h'OMK TKACIIKS. 

the Iciujt little share of the "reproach of Christ," 
which is the certain lot of every one who honestly 
leaves the riiurch where Mary is worshipped and Christ 
is scarcely known ? We can work very earnestly for 
the conversion of the Jew and the Chinese. All this 
br iigs no social reproach to us ; it cannot injure us in 
business On the contrary, we gain thereby a cliaractcr 
for cliarity ; but to stand by the converted Catholic is 
quite another matter. This nii«,'ht injure our business 
or alienate some Catholic friend, or bring on us the re- 
proach of "illibcrality," a reproach which Rome is 
so fond of casting up at others, while she herself is the 
real olTender in this matter. If you have the spirit of 
Clirist you should make every sacrifice for the man or 
woman who has had the courage to do what you have 
never done — s;icrince all things for his sake. 

Are yuu deliberately s jpporting a religion which 
lines not exalt Christ, which does not love the word of 
God, which forbids its use ? Are you supporting those 
who are the enemies of Christ, in so far as they do 
these things ? Do you not fear that he will find you 
far more guilty than they are, for you have a light 
which they have not ? 

You leave your Christian brethren unhelpcd and 
give your support to those who invoke Mary as their 
*• siilvation." How can you expect God to bless your 
households when you encourage such things ? Once 
more let me give you some extnicts from this volume 
of Catholic devotion, the ** Glories of Mary *' : 

** And I consider it indubitably true that all graces 
are dispense«l by Mary, and that jill who are saved are 
saveil only by means of this divine mother ; it is a 
necessary consequence that the salvation of all dejKjnds 



EFFECTS OF THE PLAN OF SALVATION. loT 

upon preaching ^lary, and exciting all to confidence in 
her intercession. 

'* We must consider the glory of the son not only as 
common to, but as one with that of his mother. And 
if Jesus is king of the universe Mary is also its queen, 
and as queen she possesses by right the whole kingdom 
of lier son. Hence as many creatures as there are who 
serve God, so many there are who serve Mary ; for as 
angels and men and all things that are m heaven and 
on earth are subject to the empire of God, so are thoy 
also under the dominion of Mary (p. 13). The king- 
dom of God consists in power and mercy. Reserving 
power to himself he in some way yielded the empire 
of mercy to his mother. 

" When the blessed Virgin conceived the Eternal 
Word in her womb and brought him forth she ob- 
tained half the kingdom of God. so that she is Qneen 
of Mercy as Jesus Christ is King of Justice. 

'^Let us then fly, and fly always, to the feet of this 
most sweet queen, if we would be certain of our salva- 
tion ; and if we are alarmed and disheaitened at the 
sight of our sins, let us remember that it is in order to 
save the greatest and most abandoned sinners who rec- 
ommend themselves to her that she is the Queen of 
Mercy." 

Would you deliberately prefer to give the sanction 
of your influence and the assistance of your money to 
an idolater who worshipped the great goddess Diana, 
or some heathen idol, and would you leave you Chris- 
tian fellow-creature to starve ? Practically this is 
what the great, the overwhelming majority of Chris- 
tian people are doing to-day in this country. No 
doubt you have some excuse for this (folly, shall I call 
it, or sin ?). But excuses will not avail. 

There is a confraternity in the Roman Catholic 
Church which is called the '^ Servants of Mary." 
These servants of Mary vow themselves to be lier 



158 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

slaves, and some wear, with tlie approvjil of the 
Church, littlo chains round tlicir wrists or arms, as a 
sif^n of tlieir '* slavery." Besides, there is the Confra- 
ternity of the ** Cliddren of Mtiry/' to whicli every 
child educated hy sisters is practically obliged to be- 
long. 

I liave sat at table witli a company of Christian 
women who have kept a deliberate silence on the 
groat truths of the gospel because one little m..id who 
waited was a Romanist. I have been told by more than 
one minister of the gospel that he lias actually been 
silenced at t-jible by the lady of the house because he said 
one word on the subject of the distinctive beliefs of Ro- 
manists. I think the readers of this book must know 
well that I abhor anything like violence or offensive 
controversy, but this is very different from saying the 
word in season which may save a soul. At least we need 
not give Rome the additional triumph of knowing that 
we are ashamed of our religion, or afraid to speak of it 
before those who differ from us. If one servant girl 
can control the conversation of a whole household, is 
it any wonder that Rome is triumphant, and that 
tliese iK)or girls point with pride to their Cliurch, 
which can exercise such power ? Many people are 
nuiking all sorts of siicrifices (by proxy) for the con- 
version of the heathen at a safe distance, but they 
will not dare a frown from the lieathen at home. I 
am not advocating violence or denunciation. I^icave 
that to Rome ; she cannot exist without it. She can 
only live by stern suppression of inquiry or investiga- 
tion of her deeds. Rome needs an arm of flesh, and 
says so, for the maintenance of lier power ; but for 
you, wliat do you need ? You need to confess Christ 



EFFECTS OF THE PLAN OF SALVATION. V^) 

openly iind in a Cliristian manner, if you expect tliat 
Christ will know you at the day when excuses for 
denying him will be of little avail. Rome is persecut- 
ing those who leave her to-day ; what active, self -sacri- 
ficing interest have you shown in those whom she is 
persecuting ? Rome is extending her power in every 
direction to-day ; what are you doing to extend the 
kingdom of Christ and to prevent the extension of the 
kingdom of Mary? Surely the blood of the poor and 
the ignorant will be demanded at your hands, if you 
not only will not help to save them, but even try to 
keep them in bondage. 

The poor little Israelitish servant, captive in the 
house of Kaaman the Syrian, should put many a Chris- 
tian woman to the blush. Alone in her religion, and 
even a captive, she is not afraid to speak of the power 
of her God to those around her ; and yet she at least 
would have had many excuses for silence. The Irish 
servant girl, in her bold and fearless practice of her re- 
ligion, should put the Christian Avoman to the blush. 
Is not she far more faithful than you are ? She will 
not yield, you do yield. 

I have known many cases where Romanists have 
been converted simply by hearing the word of God read 
without note or comment in Christian families ; and 
it is clearly an act of duty to invite the attendance of 
servants at family worship, no matter what their re- 
ligious views. There would of course be no savor of 
persecution about this, but the mere carrying out of the 
holy resolve of Christian people to be as consistent in 
their religion as Rome is in hers. But unhappily there 
are too many Christian families where family prayer is 



ir.() WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

unknown. Is it any wonder tluit a disorganized stato 
of society is the certain result ? 

I hoard hut lately a romarkahle instance of the ellect 
of Hihle reading in the conversion of a Catholic. Two 
young men whoso liealth was not all that a loving 
mother desired were sent to the country some few years 
since in charge of an old and faithful Irish servant. 
Tile two young men, having been accustomed to family 
j)rayi'r at home, determined at least to read the Script- 
ures together every morning. The servant, who was 
devoted to them, marvelled at the piety of these boys, 
and thought she would like to hear what they were 
reading. Nut one word was siiid to her of controversy 
or argument, but she simply listened to the reading of 
the word of Clod. The result was her conversion. The 
lady who gave me this information is the sister of one 
of the most respected ministers in this city, the Rev. 
Dr. Howard Crosby. I have his permission to state 
the facts. God grant some at least may be found to 
follow his happy example. [Even as I write I hear that 
he lias passed from death unto life. Truly he will not 
be less happy in the mansions of the blessed from liis 
youthful piety and fidelity to his Lord.] 



CHAPTER YIII. 

THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS — THE CELIBACY OF THE 
CLERGY — PURGATORY AND MASSES FOR THE DEAD. 

As this book aims only at being a simple manual of 
explanation of the principal doctrines and practices of 
the Church of Rome, I do not intend to go into minute 
details on these subjects.* 

This will, I hope, be of some service to those who are 
seeking for truth and desirous of knowing more of the 
Church which shrouds so much of its doctrines, as well 
as of its doings, in mystery. We find the teaching of 
the Church of Rome on the Sacrament of the Altar 
in each of the catechisms from which I have already 
quoted. In the first catechism the following simple 
explanation is given : 

"Q. What is the Mass? 

'^ A. The Mass is the unbloody sacrifice of the body 
and blood of Christ.^' 

Now in view of the fact that Rome declares and jn- 
sists on it that the bread becomes the actual flesh and 
the wine actual blood, how can they call the sacrifice 

* I may say here that I will have pleasure in replying 
to any communications which may be made to me by 
letter, but I would ask correspondents to remember that my 
time is valuable, as I have to wo^k to support myself since 
I left the Roman Catholic Church. I can, however, find 
time for a brief reply to any reasonable question, and will 
gladly do so. 



188 WHAT HOME TEACHES, 

an unbloody sacrifice ? Such are tlie inconsistenciea of 
a Cliuri'li wliicli proclaims itself the teacher of all man- 
kind. Further, Roman Catholic authorities have again 
and again put in evidence that tlie **wino"is seen 
and'tiUited as blood in tliese visions of saints, and tlie 
bread changed to flesh, wliich bled and on which actual 
blood was seen. 

The following question is common to all catechisms : 

" Q. Are both the body and blood of Christ under 
the appearance of bread, and under the appearance 
of wine ? 

*'A. Yes. Christ is whole and entire, true God and 
true man under the appearance of each." 

Now before I call attention to the palpable absurdity 
of this statement, and to the fact that Trunsubstantia- 
tion, which is thus taught, is a comparatively new doc- 
trine in the Church of Rome, I wish to say a word on 
the mistaken manner in which controversy with Home 
is sometimes conducted. Protestants, naturally and 
rightly, look with horror on the practical idolatry 
which is involved in the worship given to the sacra- 
mental bread and wine by Roman Catholics ; but let 
us be just to ourselves and to them. It should be re- 
membered that the Roman Catholic would shrink, as 
much as we would, from worshipping mere bread or 
wine ; hence the accusations against Rome of worship- 
j)ing *'a piece of bread,'* which some controversialists 
are fond of bringing, are simply an injustice to Roman- 
ists and an injury to the cause which they desire to 
benefit. 

I have seen, myself, in times of hot polemical contro- 
versy, large placards or posters on walls denouncing 
*' wafer gods," and I have known the bitterest feelings 



SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. 10:i 

arise in consequence. i believe the injustice wliicli 
Protestiints sometimes exhibit from ignorance has 
militated seriously against the conversion of Roman- 
ists to the Gospel. When you accuse a man of doing 
what he does not do, and denounce him as a blas- 
phemer when he is but acting according to his con- 
i'cience, he will not have much respect for your opinions 
or for your arguments. The wiser and the Christian 
way is to show that what the Romanist ^^ignorantly 
worships*" does not exist. He does not worship bread 
nor wine, because he does not believe that either bread 
or wine is there to worship. There is just all the 
difference between doing what you accuse him of that 
there is between idolatry and faith. When the Roman- 
ist believes that the bread is not present at all, and that 
it is only there in appearance, and that the wine is not 
present — that it is only there in appearance — we may 
grieve over his blindness, but we cannot truly accuse 
him of idolatry. He worships not bread but a God 
whom he believes is there upon the altar. 

It is difficult to look at things from the standpoint 
of another, yet, unless we do so, we need not hope to 
change that other. We are arguing that he does what he 
knows he does not do ; hence he either laughs at our 
argument or becomes indignant. In either case we are 
simply wasting our time. I know that some controver- 
sialists, even persons who have themselves left the 
Church of Rome, will bring bread and flour on a pub- 
lic platform and make wafers, to show their audience 
what Romanists worship. I do not believe in holding 
up the most sacred religious beliefs of any man to ridi- 
cule either in public or private. Such exhibitions may 
amuse the ignorant, and obtain a passing applause for 



164 1 1 HA r li < fMK TEA ( I IKS. 

tlie lecturer, but tlicy arc scriouBly injurious to the vcrv 
cause Nvliicli tlu'y are Kup})osi'«l to advance. It is not 
true that the Komanist worships bread; wliy then ridi- 
cule him for doing so ? It is true that he worships God, 
whom he supposes has taken the place of the bread; why 
not, in all Christian love, show him that he is mistiiken, 
and that he is ignorantly worshipping what is not there 
to worship? We must liave clear ideas ourselves on 
these subjects before we can hope to influence others. 
The words of Christ are very plain (Matthew xxvi. 
2G-29): 

*' And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and 
blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, 
and said, Take, cat : this is my body. 

*' And he took tlit? cup. and gave thanks, and gave 
it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it ; 

** For this is my blood of the New Testament, which 
is shed for many for tiie remission of sins." 

Now in order to understand Scripture, as I have sug- 
gested elsewliere,we must interpret Scripture by Script- 
ure. It is quite clear that the words of Christ were 
symbolical, as indeed his words were frequently. In tlio 
sixth chapter of the Gospel of St. John we find tliis 
symbolism explained by Christ himself. lie tells 
his disciples that he is the living bread, which came 
down from lieaven, and that lie who would live for- 
ever must eat of this bread. He tells them also that 
this bread is his flesh, which is ** meat indeed," and tlius 
the metaphors are varied, but perfectly plain ; the sim- 
})le meaning being obviously that we need the spiritual 
bread, which is Christ, in order to feed our souls for 
eternal life. 

Hut this does not satisfy Kouie. It is indeed marvel 



SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. 165 

lous what efforts she makes to confuse the plainest words 
of Scripture and to improve on them. After our Lord 
has declared that the bread is his flesh, he again returns 
to the word '*' bread.'' '^ This is that bread which came 
down from heaven ;'' so that practically the words 
" bread '' and '^ flesh " are used interchangeably and in a 
manner which shows that they are used metaphorically. 
In the larger catechism there is a long explanatory 
passage, from Avhich I give the following extract : 

*^ Q. In what words did Jesus Christ give this power 
and command to the Apostles [to say mass] ? '' 

Then follows one of those frequent misrepresentations 
which can only be classed as a deliberate effort to deceive 
the young and innocent, who have no means of verify- 
ing Scripture quotations for themselves. 

" Q. What is the meaning of these words [do this 
in commemoration of me] ? 

**A. Our Saviour meant [sic) to be thus understood: 
I took bread and brake and gave it you, saying, This 
is my body, and really and substantially made it my 
body, which is given for you. [Observe how this 
statement is put forward by Rome, as if Christ him- 
self had said these words; the object being to support 
her theory of transubstantiation.] I took the chalice 
and gave thanks and said: This is my blood, and really 
and substantially made it my blood." 

Now, how is the child, or even the adult, to know 
that Christ never said this, nor anything even approach- 
ing to it? And what an awful presumption it is for any 
human being to invent words for Christ which he never 
uttered, and to place this invention in the hands of 
i-norance which dares not question it, but must believe 
that Christ himself used these very words. ^^So do 



166 117/17' ROME TEACHES. 

you (priests) take bread, and blessing it, make it my 
bt^ly; and taking wine bless it, and make it my blood." 

Here is *in amount of '* make believe " which would 
be amusing if the subject were not so grave. The 
learner is told constiintly as facts and as Scripture 
what is pure invention, and has no existence except in 
the imagination ot the author of the book and its 
authorizer, Cardinal Gibbons. Either he must know 
that many of these statements are pure inventions to 
prop up a theory, or he must be ignorant. One doubts 
whether his ignorance, if it exists, or his knowledge, is 
the more culpable. 

Then comes another piece of *' make believe." 
*' The Apostles/' says the veracious compiler, *^ obeyed 
this command;-' that is, the command which is in- 
vented above, and made to appear as if our Ijord had 
uttered it. It follows as a mere circumstance to add 
*' as we can clearly see from the Acts of the Apostles." 
Let us give the words of the catechism again: 

**Q. Did the Apostles obey the command of Jesus 
Christ to ofTer up the unbloody sacrifice ? 

** A. The Apostles obeyed this command, as we can 
clearly see from the Acts of the Apostles, chap. xiii. 2, 
where St. Luke informs us that as the Apostles were 
* ministering ' — that is to say, ju> they were siicrificing 
to the Lord — the Holy Ghost said to them, * Separate 
me Barnabas and Saul.' The sjime sacrifice that the 
evangelist distinguishes by the term * ministration,' we 
Catholics at the i)resentday call the mass. St. ^hitthew 
the Aj)ostle, as history informs us, was pierced with a 
lance while celebrating the holy sacritice of the mass.'' 

Is it necessary to aill the attention of the reader to 
all this unfair statement of pretended facts, and to 
the most painful part of the matter, which is, that 



SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. 167 

the learner is obliged to receive these statements with- 
out question, and to believe that every word of this 
is absolutely true ? What wonder that Catholics have 
the reverence which they certainly have for mass, 
when they are thus assured on authority which they 
cannot doubt, that the Apostles said mass ; and when 
they are told that Christ said the words given above 
when he instituted the mass? Surely Eome will be 
very accountable at the last great day for this deliber- 
ate and officially sanctioned publication of words pre- 
tended to have been uttered by Christ, for this state- 
ment put before the child, and even the adult, that he 
had said such words. 

We have shown that just the same kind of reasoning 
is made to prove that Christ made St. Peter head of 
the Church and infallible. Truly we need another 
Luther to cry out on this daring presumption and say : 
But Christ never uttered these words which you presume 
to declare he " meant " to say. Who are you, to dare 
to alter the words of Christ, and to invent new ones ? 
But the Church is infallible; and if the Church chooses 
to say that Christ " meant '' to say this or that, then 
no Catholic dare to dispute or refuse to receive the 
statement of the Church. 

The object of putting words into the mouth of 
Christ is to prove that the mass was said by the com- 
mand of Christ and by the Apostles. The sort of 
proof which is given would only satisfy those who are 
kept in ignorance of both Scripture and history. No 
wonder that Kome objects to both. One asks in amaze- 
ment where " history " informs us that St. Matthew 
was pierced by a lance when he was celebrating mass ? 
But for the Catholic there is no amazement, there can 



168 WHA T ROME TEA CUES. 

only l>c belief. Has not Cardinal Gibbons authorized 
the sUitement, and has not Komo ratified it? Then 
comes another question : 

**Q. lias any enemy of the Catholic relij^ion ever 
been able to prove that a Po})e or bishop introduccni 
the sacrifice of the mass ? " 

And the answer is, of course, " No. It follows from 
this that we liave received the sacrifice of the mass 
from Jesus Christ through the Apostles." Certainly 
if Christ liad said what this catechism aflfirms ho 
*' meant ' * to say, and if it was an historical fact that 
the Apostle St. Matthew not only Siiid mass but also 
was pierced by a sword when he was saying it, the 
above assertion would not admit of dispute. 

Another question framed on the same line of pure 
jissertion follows, and has a most attractive show of 
fairne^, for it actually makes the admission that 
Christ did not offer up mass in the manner in which it 
is celebrated at the present day. 

''Christ," the catechism says, in an explanatory 
paragraph, *' instituted only the principal parts of the 
mass, which are : 1. The Offertory ; '2. The Consecra- 
tion ; 3. The Holy Communion. The Church pro- 
scribes the manner of celebrating it." Nothing is 
plainer in Scripture than that Christ and his Apostles 
gave both the bread and wine to those who received 
the communion, and nothing is more easily proved 
from history than that Kome presumed to contradict 
the teaching of Christ and the practice of the Apostles 
on this subject ; a point which we now ])roceed to show. 
The Scripture proof of the giving of bread and wine 
to all may be found in these texts — St. Matthew 
xxvi. 27 : "And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and 



SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. 1C9 

gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it." St. Mark 
xiv. 23 : ''And lie took the cup, and when he had 
given thanks; he gave it to them : and they all drank 
of it." St. John vi. 53 : ^" Then Jesus said unto them, 
Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of 
the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life 
in you." 

If apostolic usage is asked for — and Rome is very fond 
of quoting it when it suits her purpose — Eome dare 
not quote it in this case, for no words can be plainer 
than those used by St. Paul (1 Cor. xi. 26, 27) : 

''For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this 
cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come. 

*• Wherefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, and 
drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty 
of the body and blood of the Lord." 

And yet, when Rome has dared to put words in the 
mouth of Christ which he never used, we cannot 
wonder that she dares to act in direct contradiction to 
thie commands of Christ and the expressly declared 
practice of the Apostles. 

But Roman Catholic historians have told us in plain- 
est language when and how Rome departed from the 
express command of Christ, and invented the absurd 
doctrine that Christ was " whole and entire " in the 
wine and in the bread. Another statement which ex- 
pressly contradicts the words of Christ and the teach- 
ing and practice of the Apostles. In order to support 
the new doctrine of transubstantiation, Rome was 
obliged to make it appear that each part of the sacra- 
ment was complete in itself. Now we find, from Roman 
Catholic authority, that the Council of Constance, which 
was held as late as June, 1-115, was the first authority 



170 WHAT HOME TEACHES. 

for the 8Cimnito administi-ation of the bread and the 
wino ; or rather, forbidding the wine to the people. Nor 
is it only to tlie people that the wine is forbidden ; 
no priest, except tlie priest who says mass, is al- 
lowed to receive the wine. Surely this is the most 
direct opposition to the command of our divine Lord 
which could be possible. Rome excuses herself, when 
hard pressed on the subject of denying the cup to the 
laity, by saying that when Christ instituted the Liist 
Supper there were only the Apostles present. Hence 
she argues, in defiance of apostolic usage, that the 
cup was intended only for the priests, and that the 
expression ''drink ye all of it'' referred only to 
the Apostles (priests). But even here she shows a 
real dei)arture, for she forbids the priests to re- 
ceive the cup unless they are actually saying mass. 
Rome also writes her own condemnation, for in the 
very decree in which she forbids the cup to the laity — 
in which she in fact invents a sacrament of her own, 
for Christ did not establish such a sacrament as s1k3 
has made — she siiys, " Christ himself administered in 
both kiiulsto his Apostles ; and in the primitive Church 
this sacrament was received in both kinds by the 
people." 

Tlius docs Rome, even when she alters her religion, 
proclaim that the alteration is contrary to the teaching 
of Christ. In the decree of this council she further 
orders '* that any priest who should administer the cup 
to the laity should be handetl over to the Inquisition, 
and by the Inquisition be handed over to the secular 
j>ower to be burned.'' Hence the cry of Rome for 
temporal power, so that she may have some ouki to 
pxecute her decrees upon the objects of her condemna- 



SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. 171 

tion. So that Rome, where she has power, declares 
that she will put any one to death who dares to obey 
an express command of Christ. Christ says, *' Drink 
ye all of it.*' Rome says, '^ If ye drink ye shall die, as 
a punishment for disobeying the Church." 

Now it will be observed that in every place where 
our dear Lord speaks of the sacrament, he mentions 
the bread and wine separately. There is not one word 
to show that he taught that it was all the same whether 
you received the bread or the wine, or that either the 
bread or the wine was himself complete. He says 
"He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood." 
The wine was the symbol of his blood outpoured for us, 
which we are told to '^ drink,'' and the bread was the 
symbol of his body, which we are told to " eat." Noth- 
ing can be plainer than the distinction between these 
two things, which Rome, for her own purposes, makes 
as if they were one. The words of Christ are so plain 
that no one can be Justified in contradicting them. 

I suspect that few Romanists even know of the texts 
of Scripture which so plainly contradict the doctrine of 
men, as taught by the Church founded by men ; for 
all these novel ordinances of the Church of Rome are 
the work of men. It would be a revelation to many to 
know that as late as the fifteenth century this decree 
was first issued which obliged the people to disobey the 
command of Christ. 

But Rome has again and again contradicted herself 
in the most important matters, and certainly it would 
require all her infallibility to put herself right. Pope 
Leo the Great, in his homilies, has declared that '' to 
receive in one kind only is a Manichaan heresy. Here 
are his words ; his homilies may be found in every 



1 72 mi A T Ji OME TEA CUES. 

libnuv where ihe writings of the FaLlitrs iire presorved: 
** They (tlioso who refused the (Mip) receive Christ's 
body witli unworthy mouth, and entirely refuse to 
quati the blood of our redemption ; tlicrefore tliey are 
to be expelled by priestly authority from the fellowshij) 
of the saints." 

We might give sumo hundreds of proofs that the 
Church of Home and her infallible Topes have over 
and over agaui denounced as heretical what they 
now teach tis divine truth. We conclude with one 
more proof of this. At the Council of Clermont, pre- 
sided over by Pope Urban II. m person (1095), it was 
decreed m its 'J8th canon that '' Xo one shall communi- 
cate at tlie altar without he receive the body and blood 
separately and alike, unless by way of necessity and for 
caution.'' 

In 1118 Pope Paschal wrote thus to tlie Abbot of 
Cluny : 'MVo know tliat the bread was given separately 
and the wmo given separately by the Lord himself ; 
which custom we therefore teach and command to be 
always observed in Holy Church, save in the case of 
infants and very infirm people who cannot swallow 
bread.'' 

In the days which followed apostolic times there 
were serious departures from the faith, as the Apostle 
foretold. Amongst other new practices wjis the one of 
giving communioi: to children, and of dipping the 
bread into the wine, to give the communion to those 
who could not tiike the wine separately. 

When one sees all the dangers and false doctrines 
which followed from even the least disobi'dience to our 
Lord's commands, wo surely should learn a lesson of 
the wisdom and dutv of obedience, 



SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. 173 

Those who venture to improve on what Christ or- 
dained open the flood-gates of error, and must take 
the consequences. 

No wonder that Rome also contradicts the divine 
command to search the Scriptures, and imprisons, even 
at this very day, wherever she lias control, those who 
dare to read them. 

In this country, as yet, she has only power to keep the 
Bible out of the public schools. In Mexico she has 
power to imprison and punish the Bible-reader ; and it 
should be remembered that it was at the instigation of 
a priest that Penzotti was imprisoned. 

It should also be well understood that there is 
scarcely any difference between the translation of the 
Bible made by Rome and the Protestant translation; so 
that when Rome objects to the Protestant translation 
it is a mere quibble ; her object is simply to interdict 
the reading of the Bible altogether. 

What would be thought of a Protestant minister or of 
a Protestant government which acted towards Rome as 
Rome has acted toward Protestant states and ministers ? 

But it may be said — indeed, it is said by priests — that 
they preach the gospel to the people, so that they do 
not need to read the Bible. Never was there a more 
misleading statement. Here are the words of Father 
Curci, the famous Italian Jesuit, whopc opportunities 
to know what priests do are indisputable. He says : 
*' The sermons delivered on the Gospels are poor stuff, 
full of all kinds of saints and Madonnas, past, present 
and future ; of all sorts of miracles, possible and impos- 
sible ; of politics and controversy ; but the one thing 
that is never in them is Jesus Christ, his works, his 
miracles and his teaching.'' 



1 74 WHA T ROME TEA CHES. 

I can say the same from long years' experience of 
sermons in the Churcli of Kome. The one thing whicli 
is not preached is Christ, huleed, tlie more pious the 
preacher, the more lie insists on tlio necessity of look- 
ing to Mary for salvation, and the more he xlilates on 
the power of the saints. To preach Christ would be 
to overthrow the power of Kome, which is built on 
saints and the Virgin Mary, and not on Christ. Bible 
study is almost unknown amongst tlie clerg}', whose 
time is fully occupied with the traditions of men, 
curious questions of metaphysical theology, and lives 
and legends of the saints. We sliull return to this 
l)art of the subject later. 

It would seem indeed, sad as it is to say it, as if Rome, 
in very wantonness of power, changed every ordinance 
of Christ. Xow I would ask both Koman Catholic 
and Protestant readers to note that when I give ex- 
tracts from the works of the Popes, or other Roman 
Catholic authorities, they are invariably taken from 
Roman Catholic authorized publications. I have had 
occasion to say many times that Catholics do not know 
their own religion. If they did, tli re are thousands 
who would shrink with horror from what their Church 
teaches. But they are carefully prevented from know- 
ing it. Yet it is a deliberate act of their own to renuiin 
in ignorance, for no man can compel them to refrain 
from inquiry when these subjects are brought before 
them. The writings and decrees of the Popes have 
been published from time to time by Roman Catholic 
authors and canonists who are in full communion with 
the Roman Church. They are all in Latin, and hence 
it is safe to have them published, as they are almost 
inaccessible to the great majority of the people. But 



SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. 175 

there have been both Roman Catholics and Protestants 
who have studied them, and who know from Rome her- 
self what Rome teaches. 

It has been declared, as you know, that not only are 
the present and all future Popes infallible, but also that 
all the dead Popes were equally infallible. Of course 
this follows of necessity, because if only the present and 
future Popes were declared infallible, every one would 
say this is a new doctrine. Hence Rome stultifies her- 
self, as she has done over and over again. 

Now the doctrine of infallibility involves this other 
doctrine, that everything which the past Popes have 
decreed is infallible. But past Popes have decreed 
many things which flatly contradict what was decreed 
by other Popes. How then can Rome be infallible? 
How then can it be said that she has always taught the 
same doctrine ? The Roman Catholic canon law was 
published long years since, and is accessible to scholars 
in those libraries where rare books are to be found. Of 
its authenticity and value there is no question. It is a 
part of the infallible teaching of the infallible Church. 

In this body of canon law we find the following in a 
letter written by Pope Gelasius to the Bishops Major- 
icus and John (Corp. Jur. Can. Decret. III., ii., 12) : 
'' We have ascertained that certain persons having re- 
ceived a portion of the Sacred Body alone, abstain from 
partaking of the chalice of the sacred blood. Let such 
persons either receive the sacrament in its entirety or 
be repelled from the entire sacrament, because the 
division of one and the same mystery cannot take place 
without great sacrilege." Here we have a Pope, quite 
as infallible as the Pope of to-day, declaiing that what is 
done in every Roman Catholic Church to-day is a '^'sac- 



ITrt WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

rilege." Note, too, the expression which distinctly 
declares and draws the distinction between the bread as 
the body and the wine as the blood. There is here a 
positive denial of the modern Koman doctrine that the 
bread is both the body and blood of Christ, and that 
the wine is also both the body and blood of Chiist ; a 
doctrine so plainly contrary to Scripture tliat the Church 
does not defend it from Scripture, but falls back on her 
authority :us above that of Scripture, which enables her 
to do away with Scri})ture authority for whatever she 
decrees. 

It is a sacrilege, says Pope Gelasius, in a letter ad- 
dressed to his bishops, not to receive the bread and the 
wine, the body and the blood of Christ ; plainly showing 
that he tiiught that the bread was the body and the wine 
the blood, and not that both were contained under one 
form. Now for an instance of the way in which Rome 
alters what she does not wish to admit. In the an- 
cient edition of these canons, before the modern doctrine 
of receiving under one kind was invented, the Pope's 
letter was headed, " No one is permitted to receive the 
communion of the body of Christ without the blood.*' 
This was very inconvenient, so Kome had it changed as 
she has had the fathers changed ; for is she not infalli- 
ble, and therefore able to revise what they have said, 
and to know what they ought to have said ? In the 
modern editioub the heading is made to read thus : 
'* 'J'he priest ought not to receive the body of Christ 
without the blood." But even if this was the true 
reading it avails little, for it condemns the priest who 
receives without receiving the chalice ; yet l\ome to-day 
comiH'ls the priest to receive without the blood, unless 
he is siiying mass. Out of her own lips she declares 



SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. 177 

her own perversion of both Scripture truth and of the 
teaching of her Popes who lived in purer ages. 

So by degrees, step by step, Rome has continued to 
add to the commands of God her own precepts and in- 
ventions, and to make them not only of equal weight, 
but even more binding. 

Father Curci, the distinguished Jesuit who has 
lived and died a member of the Roman Church, al- 
though of necessity a much persecuted one, has written 
thus on the way in which Roman Catholics are kept in 
ignorance of the Bible. Probably he did not realize 
all that would necessarily follow from a free perusal of 
Scripture. He says, in a preface which he made to a 
translation of the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles, 
afterwards suppressed: ^'The New Testament is, of 
all books, that which is least studied and read amongst 
us, insomuch that the greater part of the laity, even 
such as are instructed and practical Catholics, do not 
so much as know that such a book exists in the world ; 
and the majority of the clergy themselves scarcely 
know more of it than they are obliged to read in the 
Missal and Breviary.'' This was written, not in the 
last century or the dark ages, but in 1879 ; not by a 
Protestant criticising the Church of Rome, but by a 
learned Jesuit father. No Avonder, then, there is so 
little Christian teaching in Italy that many Italians live 
more like savages than Christian people. 

Cardinal Gibbons published a book, to which I have 
referred before, called ^^ Faith of Our Fathers." In 
this book he says (p. 117) : '^ Every priest is obliged 
in conscience to devote upwards of an hour each day 
to the perusal of the word of God.^' Now this is a 
clear evasion of truth, not to speak more strongly, and 



178 11 'IT. \T n( )MK TK. \('H h:s. 

one that is ctMtninly most rt'j)r(.'h<'iisible ; first, be- 
cause) Ciitliolics are bound to believe it, as it is tleclared 
to be true by a bisliop ; next, because Protestants, for 
whose special bcMiefit this book luia been written, will 
never suspect that tlie statement is untrue. This book 
has liad a circulation of probably 100,000 copies in 
this country, and, if we cakulate the number of per- 
sons who have read each copy, we may estimate the 
number who liave been deceived. How sad it is that 
while Rome circulates such works by the hundred thou 
sand. Christian peoi)le troui>l(' thcniselvos verv little to 
provide an antidote for it. 

Now, what are the facts ? No priest is obliged it» 
devote upwards of an hour every day to the perusal of 
the word of God ; but he is obliged to devote upwards 
of an hour every day to reading his Breviary — a very 
different matter. "What a cruel wrong to represent 
these two utterly different things as one. It is true 
that there are a few Psalms and a few texts of Scripture 
in tlie lireviary which he recites, but most assuredly 
this is not a *' perusal '* of the word of God. The words 
taken from Scripture are the same day after day, and 
tliey are repeated in Latin, and as fast as ever they can 
be said. Would to God that Protestants could know 
liow Home deceives them ; and here, most assuredly, is a 
striking example. 

The Breviary which priests are obliged to recite is 
full of tlie most ridiculous stories about the saints, and 
the wildest romances as to their doings. I have heard 
priesta complain again and again of the obligation which 
they are under of rccftin^^all this nonsense, or it might 
be more properly called blasphemy. But why should 
the cardinal make any attempt to give Protestants 



SA ORIFICE OF THE MASS. 179 

the idea that priests read the Bible, when, a few 
pages before lie makes this statement, he says plainly 
that the Bible is not necessary, and practically slights 
it ? If this one chapter in this book was read with 
care by any true Christian, I think he could not 
fail to see where all the evil of Eome comes in. At 
page 86 he says : '^ It will not suffice to tell me that we 
have an infallible Scripture as a substitute for an infal- 
lible apostolate of the first century ; for an infallible 
book is of no use to me without an infallible inter- 
preter, as the history of Protestantism too clearly dem- 
onstrates." 

Thus we find the cardinal declaring that the Bible 
is of "no use " without the Church, and placing the 
Church above the word of God. Protestants differ 
in their interpretation of certain passages of Scripture, 
but they all agree on the one great truth of the Chris- 
tian faith, that we can only be saved by Christ. There 
is no difference of opinion on this, the vital point in 
the Christian religion. The religion of the " infallible " 
Church, which makes such a claim to certainty and 
unity of belief and taunts the Christian with not follow- 
ing her example, is actually the only so-called Christian 
Church on earth which is perpetually changing her 
religious belief. It is the Roman Catholic and not the 
Protestant who changes his religion, and believes one 
thing is necessary to salvation to-day and another 
to-morrow. Even in the last few pages we have shown 
how R jme has changed her teaching on the most 
important points within the last few years, and how 
she has been perpetually changing. AYhen Rome 
ceases to put the burden of new doctrines on her fol- 
lowers, it will be time for her to say that private inter- 



180 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

pretation of the IJiblo leads to religious discord. We 
have ut le:ist far less division of opinion than liome 
has, with Iier claim of infallibility. 

It would rcfjuiro a volume to take all the {wints of 
tliis book and show Ijow thorouj^hly misleading it is. 
I^'t one more specimen sulTice. At page 8G it says : 
** Christ matlo a solemn prediction that no error shall 
ever invade his Church/' We may well ask in 
amazement when and where this prediction was 
made. The reply would be, " When he said that the 
* gates of liell should not prevail against it.' " liomo 
is pleased to interpret this as a "prediction" that 
there should be an infallible ('hurch which sliould 
never err. The Romanist must believe this to be 
the true interpretation of this text, no matter what 
Ihe text may appear to him to prove. Hut for us who 
are at liberty to tliink for ourselves surely nothing 
could be more absurd than such an interpretation. 
Th« re is not one word about the Church being '* free 
from error/' though it is declared tliat it sliall not be 
overcome by evil. It is one thing for a beleaguered 
city to be promised that it shall not be " prevailed 
against " by those who attack it, and quite another to 
declare that the citizens shall not make any mistake 
in their mode of warfare. But in truth, even if the 
promise implied that the Church should not err, we 
may admit it, for the true Church of Christ has never 
erred. 

But the Bible itself disproves the bold assertion of 
Kome, for we find in the Book of Revelation, and in the 
Roman Catholic vei-sion as well as in the Protestiint, 
that the divine Spirit had to reprove the various 
churches for the errors into whitdi they liad fallen even 



CELIBACY OF THE CLERGY. 181 

in the times of the Apostles. Once more let it be said 
that Rome is wise in keeping the Scriptures out of the 
liands of her people, and still more wise in demanding 
that they shall not interpret it for themselves, or take 
any interpretation except that which she places on the 
sacred text. Poor Peter ! if he was the ^^ infallible" 
rock, he made a sad show of his infallibility when he 
denied his Lord with oaths and curses. Do his succes- 
sors expect to be better than he was ? Alas, they also 
deny the Lord, but they do not repent, as he did, with 
many tears. Eoman controversialists make a great 
point out of the fact that the Scriptures were not 
written for some time after the death of Christ. But 
they were written in the lifetime of the Apostles, and 
this is a very important point which should not be 
overlooked ; and we read in them exactly the value 
which the Apostles put on them — another very impor- 
tant point, above all for a Church which makes such a 
boast of being founded on the Apostles. In the Acts 
of the Apostles we find that those who searched the 
Scriptures daily are called ''noble." Rome classes 
them with the wicked in her excommunications of Bible • 
readers. Let no one be deceived. A cardinal may 
tell you that Rome, or that he, approves of reading 
the Bible, but that cardinal knows that Rome has pro- 
nounced a curse on Bible reading and Bible Societies ; 
a curse which, coming from her, is infallible. 

With regard to the celibacy of the clergy very little 
need be said. Rome does not pretend that it is of divine 
institution. It is simply a command of the Church ; 
but, like most of the commands of the Church, it is 
directly opposed to the commands of the Bible. Rome 
does not act without reason when she forbids the read- 



183 W HAT h UMt: TEA ( HES. 

ing of thu liible. Hvoii in the book of wliich we have 
spoken above, wo fuul that while Cardinal Gibbons ap- 
j)oar8 in one place to conirnond the reading of the Bible, 
in another ho distinctly declares that the Hible is at best 
unnecessiiry, and that it is useless without the Churcli. 
One would like to know which of the seven churches 
spoken of in the inspired word of (lod he would con- 
sider the Church. Each liad sinned, some more, some 
less, and certainly none were considered infallible. 

Now both Scripture and antiquity are opposed to the 
celibacy of the clergy ; and it is remarkable that in the 
holy Scriptures we are not only told that the priests 
should marry, but we are given a definite reason iHtij 
they should marry. We know that St. Peter was a 
married man, and that our Lord showed his ap}>roval 
of St. Peter's marriage by healing his mother-in-law. 
If St. Peter, the head of the Church according to 
Home, was a married man, why should not his succes- 
sors marry 't The truth is, that as soon as Home began 
to crave and obtain temporal power, she needed to keep 
lier priests as a class apart, and hence she bound them 
to a man-made law of celibacy. 'J'liis is a subject that 
has not met with sufficient consideration. A man who 
is vowed to celibacy, and who has no ties to his country, 
is easily made the tool or slave of his ecclesiastical 
superior. I believe that the celibacy of the clergy has 
been the main support of Home, for it has placed the 
priesthood, through whom she rules, at her mercy. 
These men are alone, isolated from their fellows ; they 
liave severed themselves from all ties of kiiulred, and 
the rulers of their Church* are the only power to whicli 
they can look for advancement, or for punishment if 
they disobey. Ilence their unhappy state of slavish 



CELIBACY OF THE CLERGY. 183 

submission, from Avliich there is no release for them but 
death. I have lieard priests speak of their bishops 
witli the utmost contempt, yet the next moment they 
were abjectly kneeling at their feet begging their 
blessing. The amount of hypocrisy and insincerity 
which flows from this system should be known to bo 
believed. But so well does Rome conceal her secrets 
from those who are without, that it is not even suspect* 
el. Xo priest dare express his real sentiments in re- 
gard to his bishop or other ecclesiastical superior ; even 
Protestant opinion would be, and is, against him if he 
dares to be honest. There is not another Christian 
body in the whole world whose members are so en- 
slaved, or whose clergy are compelled to silence, no 
matter what they may know of those who are placed 
over them. If the ministers of other denominations 
concealed the evils which they knew, bitter indeed 
would be the condemnation which would be heaped on 
them for so doing. But where Rome is concerned 
there must be the silence of the grave to cover her 
rottenness of corruption. Xo wonder that when Roman 
Catholics at last turn from their Church, as they have 
done in France and Italy, forever disillusioned with 
evils which they were powerless to expose, that they 
become infidels. 

Now it can scarcely be denied, even by Rome, that 
the Apostles knew what our Lord intended should be 
done in regard to the Christian ministry. Whatever 
they have said, therefo'e, on any subject must be taken 
as the express will of Christ ; and woe to him who 
makes himself wiser than h:s Master ! AYe are not left 
in any doubt as to the kind of men God would have 
for the teachers of his Church. Here are the words 



184 W'JIAT UOMK TKACJIKS. 

of tlio Apostlo St, Paul, wlio iniiKt Imvc known tlio 
minil of Clirist, and liail far nioro authority to declare 
it than any Pope or priest could have to-day (I Tim. iii. 
l-li): 



1 This is a true .siiyiiig, If a man desire the oniee 
)Yi, 1)0 desireth a £ 

2 A bisliop then must he blameless, tlie liusband of 



of a bisliop, 1)0 desireth a good work. 



one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to 
liospitality, apt to teacli ; 

3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filtliy 
lucre ; but patient; not a brawler, not covetous ; 

4 One tliat ruK'th well his own house, liaving ]iis 
children in subjection with all gravity ; 

5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, 
how shall lie take care of the church of God ?) 

G Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he 
fall into the condemnation of the devil. 

7 Moreover, he must have a good report of tlicm 
wliich are witliout ; lest lie fall into reproach and the 
snare of the devil. 

8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not double- 
tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy 
lucre ; 

9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a i)ure con- 
science. 

10 And let these also first be proved ; then let them 
use the oftice of a deacon, being found blameless. 

11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slander- 
ers, sober, faithful in all things. 

12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, 
ruling their children and their own liouses well. 

Now I would ask any Koman Catholic who may read 
this book to look at the Douay Bible, which their 
Church admits to be correct, and tlu^y will see just the 
same words there. How could any Pope command priests 
not to marry after sucli an express declaration of the 
inspired Apostle? It is all the niori' im]M)rtant. as Kome 



CELIBACY OF THE CLERGY. 185 

claims St. Paul as well as St. Peter as her patron saint. 
The reason which is given why priests should marry 
should also be carefully noticed, as indeed we should 
carefully notice every word that comes from God to us, 
through the holy Scriptures. This reason should remove 
the least objection that could be made to the marriage 
of the priest. This reason takes the very ground from 
under the feet of Rome in forbidding to marry. '^ If," 
says the Apostle Paul, '^ a man knows not how to rule his 
own house, how shall he take care of the Church of God ?" 
No words could be plainer. It is simply stated that he 
who has had experience in ruling his own house is best 
fitted to rule God's Church. And yet Eome pretends 
that God's Church can be better served by an unmar- 
ried clergy. Disobedience to the divine precept, and 
even to a precept which is so fully explained, could go 
no further. It is remarkable also that St. Paul proph- 
esies in the next chapter exactly what Rome has done. 
''In the latter times,'' he says, ''some shall depart 
from the faith . . . forbidding to marry, and com- 
manding to abstain from meats" (1 Tim. iv. 1). No 
words could more plainly describe the apostasy of 
the Church of Rome. She alone of all churches for- 
bids those to marry for whose married lives the very 
Apostle has given especial directions, and she alone com- 
mands '•' to abstain from meats. ^' 

We now proceed to show that it is indeed in the " lat- 
ter times " that Rome has fulfilled this prophecy, for it 
was not until the year 1074 that the Popes made it com- 
pulsory on the priest to abstain from marriage. If only 
Romanists knew the facts of history as well as the truths 
of the Bible, how different their lives would be ! No 
wonder that Rome claims the right to educate and to con- 



Ks« WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

trol (Hlucation even in secular things. She dare not 
allow even the truths of history to be known, for the 
light of truth w<»ul(l ilispcl the darkness of her false 
teaching. Hut what shall be siiid of I^rotesUints who 
will not allow the Uouianist to share in the light of 
truth which they enjoy, aiul who will help to keep them 
ill ignorance, to pleiu^e the priest, or to siive themselves 
the trouble of maintaining God's truth? We will see 
later by what a clever device the married clergy were 
driven to leave their wives. But there is one thing 
which we have not yet noted, and it is important. I 
believe there arc very few Roman Catholics who know 
anything about the Greek Church, for ignorance is 
their normal and compulsory condition, even according 
to the teaching of the Koman Catholic Church. The 
Greek Church is to-day a part of the true Church. It sep- 
arated from the Roman Catholic Church because the 
Patriarchs of this Church would not submit to the exac- 
tions of the Popes, whose infallibility was never even sus- 
pected then, but whose pretensions this great body of 
Christians denied. Rome has found herself in this pre- 
dicament, that if she denied the orders of the Greek 
Church she must first deny her own orders. Hence, if a 
priest of the Greek Church should join the Church of 
Rome, lie is not re-ordaincd, as the ministers of other 
churches would be, but he is allowed to say mass just 
the same as any other priest. 

This is a very important point for Roman Catholics 
to know, as it shows that there are priests outside of 
the pale of the Church of Rome who even she admits 
are priests, and who can iul minister the sacramcn s as 
well and jis validly as she can. It is true that Rome 
declares the Greek Church is in ** schism,*^ because 



CELIBACY OF THE CLERGY. 187 

slie does not submit to her rule, but she cannot deny 
her the validity of her sacraments. In the Greek 
Church the ancient and Scriptural custom of the 
marriage of the priests still continues. Hence Komc 
is the only Christian Church which is guilty of the 
apostasy from Christ which the Apostle Paul predicted. 
Surely this should make every Romanist think care- 
fully. But this is not all. In the Greek Church both 
the bread and the wine are given to all, so that Rome 
stands alone also in depriving the people of what God 
himself commanded them to receive. 

The decision of the Council of Trent is worth not- 
ing here, and comparing with the contradictory decis- 
ion of Pope Gelasius : 

Gelasius, a.d. 492. j Decree of Trent, a.d. 1551. 

"Certainly the sacrament | "By the consecration of 
of the body and blood of our the bread and wine the wliole 
Lord, which we receive, is fnibstcince of the bread is con- 
a divine thing, because by verted into the substance of 
these we are made partakeis the body of Christ, and the 
of the divine nature. Never- ichole substance of the ivine is 



converted into the substance 
of his blood ; wiiich conver- 



sion is suitably and properly 
called by the Cat iiolic Church 
Transubstantiation." 



theless, the substance or na- 
ture of the bread and wine 
cease not to exist; and, as 
suredly, the image and simili- 
tude of the body and blood of 
Christ are celebrated in the 
action of the mysteries." 

The Council of Trent teaches the wliole substance of 
the bread is converted into the body of Christ, and the 
wliole substance of the wine into his blood. How then 
can there be bread or the body of Christ in the wine or 
blood, and wine or the blood of Christ in the bread ? 

Now, this deserves more than a passing notice. It 
is amazing what an amount of pos.tive contradiction, 
and self-evident contradiction, there is in every dogma 
of the Church of Rome. That Church simply and 



188 H7/.17' J:(fMK TKACHES. 

effectively saves lierself from destruction by tlie deter- 
mination witli whicli slio forbids free discussion. 
Wbero tlieroisno discussion tliere can be no contradic- 
tion. Jt is not within tlie plan on which I am writing 
the present work to enter into any personal remarks 
or experience, but I think in justice to myself, or — 
what is far more important— in justice to the cause of 
trutli, I am bound to say one word on this subject. 
As long as I was a member of the Church of Rome 
I dared not discuss any doctrine of that Churchs There 
is one answer to every discussion or question. You 
must not even think of it if a doubt presents itself. 
Kemember that the Church is infallible, and that it is 
a daily sin to question lier infallibility, and you do this 
whenever you entertain for even one second a doubt 
as to any doctrine which she has authorized. AVould 
to God that Christian people would only realize to 
themselves the chains by which Kome has bound her 
victims. Ivcmember that the priests are quite as mucli 
bound Jis the laity. They may become altogether infidel, 
as many do, as many of the laity have done, as in fact 
whole nations invariably do, as the result of the absence 
of Scripture teacliing. But as long as the priest or the 
layman or woman has the faintest belief in Kome, they 
dare not allow a doubt to rest in the mind for a single 
moment. How tlien could they pause even to consider 
carefully any (luestion which might arise to trouble 
them 'f We, when in doubt or trouble, spiritual or 
otherwise, pray to God for light ; the Komanist dares 
not utter such a prayer, lie is supposed to do wrong 
if he wishes for any light, because he has the Church 
to guide him. And then doubt is troublesome and 
painful, and if wo can i>t'rsnadf ourselves that doubt is 



CELIBACY OF THE CLERGY. 180 

also sinful, we relieve our minds from ii heavy burden, 
and find a rest which, if it is not the rest of God, is 
supposed to be such. To pray for light would be to 
doubt the Church. All that the doubting llomanist 
dare do, or will be allowed to do, is to ' • make an act of 
faith in the Church." Here are the very words: "'I be- 
lieve all things which the Holy Catholic Church teaches 
all nations to believe, because she is taught by thee.'' 
Who dare doubt a Church authorized by God himself 
to teach ? This is the almost impregnable position of 
liome, and the plain secret of her power. But I know 
well how difficult it is for any one to understand this 
who has not been a Romanist of at least many years' 
standing, as I have been. It is only when some doubt 
comes with crushing and overwhelming force that 
touches on the question of infallibility that there is 
hope for the Romanist. When the Church shows her 
greed too openly, as she ever has done when she 
has unlimited power, and misuses that temporal power 
which she so wildly craves at present, then the people 
cannot but see the sin which follows, and they recoil 
from the thought that such a Church can be of divine 
origin. But they know nothing of Christianity except 
to fear it, and naturally they lapse into more or less 
open infidelity. 

Rome has another argument also. She is infallible ; 
therefore she has a right to conqjel the submission of 
tliose who differ from her. At present she has not 
sufficient power in this country to kill the heretic, but 
she claims that she has the right to do so, and she will 
do so as soon as the American people have given her 
sufficient strength to enforce what she teaches. At 
present she can only persecute in a quiet way ; but that 



PMi U'JIAT ni)MK TEACUES. 

(|ui«'L way is very fffectivo. Komo never Rpiires when 
she hjia the [)ower to inflict ])uiiishnit'iit ; why tlien 
shouUl she bo so tenderly dealt with ? She claims the 
right to persecute. Why should she not bo obliged at 
leiU5t to tolerate those who discuss her rights? Yet to- 
day it is almost impossible to find a Christian Churcli 
which will venture or care to allow the injustices of 
Koine to b? discussed in her pulpit. Soon Rome, em- 
boldened and intoxicated with power, will be able to 
forbid the preaching of the gosj)el in these same pulpits. 
Even the very churches whose missionaries have been 
thrown into loathsome dungeons by the power of Rome 
dare not or will not come out boldly and denounce the 
Church which has been guilty of this cruelty, and of this 
insult to God ; for surely an insult to the i)reacher of the 
eternal gospel is an insult to God himself. Rome knows 
how to deal with any infringement on the rights of the 
Church. What are wo doing about the rights of the 
everlasting gospel ? 

The admission of the validity of the saci*aments of 
the Greek Church by the Church of Rome is a matter 
of far grciiter importance in the controversy than 
Protestants would suppose. 

In order to understand it at all it must be remem- 
bered that Rome makes the sjicraments absolutely 
necessary to salvation, and claims that she is the only 
Church which can administer them lawfully. Yet in 
the face of this she is obliged to admit that the sacra- 
ments of tho Greek Church are as valid as hers. Tliis 
is a ])oint to be brought before Romanists, as they are 
kei)t carefully in ignorance on this subject. 

It will have been seen that tho Greek Church, which 
Itomo admits liei-self to be a jiart of the Cliristian 



PURGATORY AND MASSES. 191 

Cliurcli, and wliose very sacraments slie cannot deny to 
be valid, contradicts Rome on the two vital questions of 
the celibacy of the priests and on the giving of the cup 
to the laity. Now I do not suppose there is one Romanist 
in a thousand who knows anything about this. I know 
that my own astonishment was great indeed when I found 
that the Greek Church had orders which Rome could 
not, and in fact did not, deny. Rome has so long 
appeared before the public as the "one and only" 
Church, that it is an amazement when it is discovered 
that there is another Church, from which even she differs 
only in that this Church will not submit to her demand 
to rule it. If Romanists knew the truth about the 
Greek Church, its extent — for it has as many members 
as the Church of Rome — and its history, I have no doubt 
that many Romanists would pause and ask, Why is it 
that Rome has so long deceived us into believing that 
she, and she alone, has the power of the keys ? The 
priest of the Greek Church has just the same power 
to absolve, according to the teaching of the Church of 
Rome, as the Roman Catholic priest. 

But again, the compulsory ignorance in which the 
Church of Rome keeps her people is to her own ad- 
vantage. She knows that where ignorance is strength, 
she is wise to enforce ignorance, and she does so. - 

We now proceed to consider briefly the subject of 
purgatory and masses for the dead ; and here again a 
little common sense would help to dispel many errors. 
But here also Rome can and does protect herself by 
enforcing the suppression of every doubt. 

Rome teaches, as we all know, that very few people 
go to heaven when they die. The presumption is, in 
fact, that no one goes there except the very few whom 



1 W J WHA T ROMF: tea CUES. 

slie has canonized ; an I oven some theologians have 
dared to say that all canonized saints do not go to 
hciiven ; or, in other words, that Uome sometimes canon- 
izes those who are not siiints. Few persons have an idea 
of the terrible nncertainty of the whole Iloman Catho- 
lic system of sjilvation. And how could it be otherwise ? 
Salvation is certain only when we seek it through Christ, 
who alone can save us. /When we go to other sources 
of salvation we are lost in a maze of doubt and despair. 
At best the dying Uomanist can only hope that he may 
go to purgatory. The death-bed of the poor Uomanist, 
if he has even a glimpse of truth, is a pitiable siglit. 
'I'he ignonint simply believe that the priest will do every- 
thing for them, and they die in a sort of stupid con- 
tent. Their s;ilvation need not concern them, for tlie 
priest has all this in his charge./ There is no tender 
longing to see Jesus, for Jesus is scarcely thought of 
except as a stern judge, who will condemn them, 
while Mary is the merciful Mother, who will certainly 
save them. Even the death-bed of the educated Cath- 
olic is a sad one, for he looks just the same to a terri- 
ble coming purgatory, Mhere he is told his sufferings 
will be as great as the sulTeringsof the damned in hell. 
Tlie only difference between hell and purgatory is that 
ho may shorten the time of suffering in purgatory by 
giving money to the i)riest to siiy masses for him. I 
have seen many Roman Catholic death-beds, and I never 
saw a really happy death. IIow can death bo happy 
when the poor soul knows or believes that it is going 
from a bed of pain here to abed of torment in the other 
world; when at best it can only liope for salvation, and 
when it does not look to Jesus for s:ilvation ? Yet the 
Chureli botists that every one who belongs to her iscer- 



PURGATORY AND MASSES. 19n 

tain of salvation. Such is her theory ; but most certainl} 
there was never sucli a system of self-contradiction as 
the system of salvation as taught by Rome. Let us 
examine the matter a Httle further, and let us also, 
while we examine it, have a little pity and say a little 
prayer for those poor souls who dare not examine 
whether these things are so, and whether they are true 
or false. 

In the first place, nothing can be plainer than the 
teaching of Rome as to the certainty that the blessed 
Virgin goes down into purgatory every Saturday and 
takes from it all who have worn her scapular dur- 
ing their lifetime. Here are the exact words, taken 
from the infallibly authorized '^ Book of the Scapu- 
lar.'^ 

To those who wear the scapular during life the Vir- 
gin makes this promise : '^I, their glorious Mother, on 
the Saturday after their death, will descend to purga- 
tory and deliver those whom I shall find there, and take 
them up to the holy mountain of eternal life." Words 
could not be plainer, and, as we have said before, there 
is no dogma of the Church of Rome better authenti- 
cated, for no less than four Popes have placed the 
seal of their infallible approval on this promise. And 
this is the consolation which the dying Romanist is 
offered. It is true that a show is made of placing the 
crucifix in the hands of the dying ; but it is Mary, and 
Mary only, who is invoked by the dying. Why should 
it not be so when the Church teaches so positively that 
the dying must look to her for salvation from purga- 
tory, which they have been taught to dread with such 
a terrible apprehension ? In fact the only use made 
of the name of Jesus in this matter is to declare that 



194 WHA T ROME TEA CHES. 

he has conceded tliis favor in heaven ; that he has 
placed the release of the souls from purgatory in the 
hands of his Mothor ; and this is aftirmcd hv Pope 
John XXII. 

But nearly all the prayers of tlie dying are addressed 
to Mary. A favorite ejaculation is, ** Sweet lieart of 
Mary, be my siilvation!" This prayer is authorized 
and indulgenced by the Koman Catholic Church ; and 
yet we are asked to believe that this Church does 
not teach her people to look to Mary for salvation. 
Another favorite prayer, both for the living and the dy- 
ing, is what is called, from the first words of the prayer, 
the ** Ilail, holy Queen." In this Mary is invoked as 
"the life, the sweetness and the hope ''of the poor 
Romanist. She is called '^ Our /Vdvocate; '' and yet the 
Scripture tells us that we have an advocate with the 
Father who is not Mary. Another prayer also in- 
dulgenced is this: *' f.eave me not, my Mother, in my own 
hands, or I am lost." It is useless to say more. These 
and hundreds of prayers which are in every-day use in 
the Koman Church prove that when a priest, or any 
one, declares that Koman ists only ask ^fary to pray for 
them, and that they do not look lo her for salvation, 
they either do not know the meaning of language, or 
they are terribly deceitful.X Liguori says, ** lie who is 
protect<'d bv Marv will be saved ; be who is not will be 
lost."/ 

But if Mary has all this power, and if she can and 
does release from purgatory, on the Saturday after they 
die, all those wl»o wear her scapular, what is the 
use of having masses said for them ? Here is one 
of the many inconsistencies and absurdities of Koman- 
ism, wliich would be at once discovered if Kome did 



PURGA TOR y AND 3r ASSES. 1 Oo 

not forbid, under the most terrible penalties, her sub- 
jects to think. 

The Romtin Catholic Oliurcli, in common honesty, 
shouhl either declare that the Popes who have au- 
thorized the statement that Mary will release after 
death the souls who have worn her scapular in life 
were mistaken, or they should cease to say masses for 
them. Taking souls out of purgatory when they are not 
in purgatory! As for the doctrine of indulgences only 
one word need be said. Of what use are they when an 
infallible Pope has decreed that any one wearing the 
scapular will be released from purgatory so soon after 
his death? Why trouble to get them, or gain them, 
when a much easier plan is at hand, and you have only 
to wear the scapular ? AYe may well ask, Is this a 
Christian religion, in which every mode of salvation 
that man can devise is practised, and God's salvation 
is practically set aside ? 



CHAPTER IX. 



DOCTRINE OF INTENTION. 



It is somewlmt iliflicult to decide which may be con- 
sidered the principiil means of salvation in tlie Uoman 
Catholic Cliurch. The first condition certainly is that 
you believe in the infallibility (now) of the Pope, 
Formerly, as I have shown, this doctrine was unknown, 
and even repudiated by many of the most eminent 
divines of that Church ; but we take things as they are. 
In the year ISIJO you could not be sjived unless you be- 
lieved the C/iurrh infallible. 80 far the Pope has not 
altered any material doctrine of the Church, though 
there are plain indications tliat lie is prepared to do 
so when it is more convenient, by making the temporal 
power of the Church an article of faith. 

The Church, or the Pope, teaches that there are seven 
sacraments, the sacraments being the substitution for 
salvation through Christ alone. It might be said 
truly that belief in the Virgin ^lary is a siicrament of 
tlie Koman Church, for it is so strongly enforced in 
every way, and on tlie infallible authority of the Pope. 

These seven sacraments are : Bai)tism, Confirmation, 
Holy Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Holy Or- 
ders, and Matrimony. 

In a volume such as the present it will not be neces- 
sary to treat of these sacraments individually, nor at 
great length. The Uoman Catholic accepts them, with 
the distinctive teaching belonging to each, solely on the 



DOCTRINE OF INTENTION. 197 

authority of the Church ; and wo trust the reader luis 
seen tlitit there is no foundation wliatsoever for this 
authority ; tliat our Lord never gave to St. Peter the 
gift of personal infaUibility ; and if St. Peter never had 
such a gift, certainly no Pope has it, for the Popes 
claim to have received it through St. Peter.* 

But there is one subject not generally known which 
must be considered here. It may seem amazing and al- 
most incredible to some of my rea 'ers, but it is neverthe- 
less true. No Roman Catholic can be sure that he has 
been baptized, nor can he be sure that he has been ab- 
solved, nor can he be sure that the Pope is lawfully the 
Pope ; and I doubt if one Roman Catholic in a thou- 
sand knows this ; yet here is plain Roman Catholic 
proof that this state of things exists. I must add also 
that I knew nothing of this terrible fault in the Roman 
Catholic plan of salvation until some little time after 
I had left the Church of Rome. Thus does Rome 
keep her people in the darkest and most fatal igno- 
rance. Alas ! what shall be said of Christian people 
who have the light themselves, and who will not try to 
help those who are living in this worse than heathen 
darkness ? 

No Roman Catholic can deny the authority of the 
Council of Trent. The Roman Catholic Church based 
all her faith on the decisions of this council; at least she 
did so until the Pope was made infallible. In this 
council one of the most momentous subjects which 
was discussed was the doctrine of ^' Intention. ^^ The 
word is simple enough; the consequences are tremen- 

* See page 105 and following pages for the extracts from 
the Roman Catholic catechisms* and note the misleading use 
which is made of perverted texts of Scripture. 



198 WHAT ROMK TEACHES. 

(loiis. As I liiivo said, I never heard oven one word 
of this doctrine until some time after I had left the 
Church of Rome. My attention wiis called to it almost 
accidentally. I was amazed, and I may aild, also, I was 
more thankful than words can tell, that I had left a 
Church in whicli, given all the advantages possible, you 
can never be sure of your salvation. And what a tre- 
mendous contrast is all this to the gosj^l of Christy 
where you have liim only to trust. '* He who cometli 
unto mo, I will in no wise cast out.'' Rome says, Goto 
the priest; but after you have gone and done all that 
the Church demands, you may still be lost forever, 
because the priest to whom you went may not liave 
the right *' intention '' in administering the sacraments, 
and the bishop who made him a priest may not have 
bad the right intention in making him a priest, so 
lie may not be a priest at all. In fact it is a question 
if there is really any priest or bishop or Pope in the 
Church of Home, so doubtful does this doctrine of in- 
tention make every siicramcnt. Dear Roman Catholic 
readers, come to Christ. There is no doubt about his 
intention. He intends to save to the uttermost all \^^^o 
COME UNTO iiiM. What more canyon want? What 
Biore can you desire? What a difference between this 
divine cert;4inty of salvation and all the doubt and un- 
certainty of salvation in the Roman Catholic Church, 
even when you have complied with all her demands! 

The question of intention was started at the close of 
the second century, when Gregory VIII. was Pope. It 
began with his efforts to comi>el the clergy to celibacy ; 
a compulsion which they resisted very bitterly. It is 
nol generally known, eitlitr to Roman Catholics or to 
Protestants, how gradual has been the growth of 



DOCTRINE OF INTENTION. 199 

Koman Catholic teaching. From age to age some new 
doctrine or practice has been brought in, and when 
there has been any question as to the power to change 
religious belief so often, Catholics are silenced with the 
infallibility of the Church, I was about to write; now 
we must say with the infallibility of the Pope, since the 
Church is no longer infallible. The married clergy died 
hard, and many w^ere the legislative enactments of Rome 
on this subject. I will, however, return to this point 
later, for the present we are only concerned with it as 
regards this amazing doctrine of intention. Gregory 
knew well how to compel obedience. He did so by the 
very simple method of cutting off the supplies of the 
priests who persisted in marr\ing. He forbade the 
faithful to attend the masses said by married priests ; 
those who kept concubines were not disqualified. 

Thus was the law of God defied, and the law of the 
Pope placed above it. Is it any wonder that some have 
declared the Pope Antichrist? Who shall say that 
they are without some foundation for the charge, terri- 
ble as it is ? Of course the people were afraid to attend 
masses which were pronounced invalid, and the married 
priest had to face poverty, which soon brought submis- 
sion. But what an utter state of demoralization for a 
so-called Christian Church ! 

Priests of the Church of Rome, not being allowed to 
live according to the light of the Holy Ghost instructing 
their consciences, and being obliged to submit in every- 
thing to the Church, have been driven, frona sheer want 
of an outlet for intellectual occupation, to invent the 
most absurd and abstruse scholastic theology. Rome 
lets them amuse themselves, since she knows that any 
moment she can silence whichever side she wishes ; 



200 U7/.17' JiUMK TKACIIKS. 

hoiico 2i fierce discusHioii nroso for Bevenil centuries on 
this subject of intention. It would be (juite useleea to 
enter into details here ; it is sufficient to say that the 
Council of Trent, whose decisions are deemed infal- 
lible by the Church, and St. Thomas, whose decisions 
are deemed infallible by the present Pope, all unite in 
declaring that the priest who administers baptism, for 
example, must have some intention in order to admin- 
ister it validly ; but the question remains, In wliat does 
this intention consist? 

St. Bonaventura, one of the greatest authorities in the 
Church of Rome, declared that, even if the Churcli 
I>ronounced the baptism invalid, God might consider it 
valid — that is, God might supply the defect in the in- 
tention of the priest ; but what an absurdity, and we 
miiy add, what an irreverence I But the two great 
authorities with regard to this doctrine of intention, 
which is of such supreme importance to every Catholic, 
are these : The decision of the Council of Trent, and 
the decision of Pope Alexander VIII. We give first tlie 
decision of the Council of Trent. Borne is a cursing 
Church. We know that under the old law a curse was 
pronounced on those who sinned ; but in the law of 
love of Christ Jesus, old things have passed away, an<l 
Bome sliows liow little she lias of the spirit of Christ 
by her insistance of her right to persecute, and by the 
fearful curstis which she pronounces on all who differ 
from her. The Council of Trent has declared it to be 
an article of faith that the sacraments are not valid 
unless the priest who administers them has a right in- 
tention. Thus the hapless sinner who seeks to obtain 
pardon of his sins is placed at the mercy of one who 
may be a far greater sinner than himself, and can 



DOCTRINE OF INTENTION. 201 

never be sure wliether this man to whom he has gone 
for absolution has the power to absolve him. 

There can be no dispute on the part of Romanists as 
to what I say in regard to the Council of Trent and 
Pope Gregory, for I give below the authorities for these 
statements from Roman Catholic sources. The fathers 
of the Council of Trent, in their list of curses pro- 
nounced on those who dare to dispute their teachings, 
curse every one who says that it is not necessary for a 
priest to have an intention when he administers the 
sacrament. 

It is no wonder that Bellarmine has said : '' No one 
can be certain, by the certainty of faith, that he re- 
ceives a true sacrament, since a sacrament cannot be 
celebrated without the minister's intention ; and no one 
can see the intention of another. '^ But he has still 
more to say on this all-important subject. '*We have 
no moral certainty that they (the bishops of the Roman 
Catholic Church) are true bishops ^' What an awful 
decision from such an authority ! The poor Roman 
Catholic is taught by his Church that he cannot be 
saved unless he receives the sacraments. His Church 
further teaches that, as the validity of the sacraments 
depends on the intention of the priest, he can never 
know whether he has received them at all or not. 
Further, though the intention which the priest had 
who administered the sacrament to him may have been 
valid, that priest himself may not be a priest, because 
his ordination, or the ordination of the bishop who or- 
dained him, may have been invalid. 

When the subject of intention was under discussion 
at the Council of Trent, Ambrogio Caterino, Bishop of 
Minori, said, in a speech before the assenibled fathers : 



903 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

" But 8upposin<; thoneccssity of mental intention — if 
a priest chiirj^ed with tlie cjire of four or five tliousand 
souls was not an unbeliever.but a hypocrite who, whether 
in tlie baptism of cluUlren or in the absolution of peni- 
tents or m the C'>ntie('ration of the eucluirist, ha^l no 
intention of doin;^ what the Church does, we must say 
that all the children were damned, the penitents not 
absolved, and all those who liave received the com- 
munion iiave received uo advantage from it." 

And lie added : 

** If any siiid tliut these cases were rare, would to 
(tod tliat in this corrupt age there were no cause to 
think that they are very frequent, l^ut, even admit- 
ting them to be very rare, or even unique, yet suppose, 
for example, a bad priest, who is a liypocrite and who 
has no intention of administering true baptism to a 
child, and that afterwards this child sliould become 
bishop of a great city, and during a long succession of 
years he has ordained a great number of priests; we 
must admit that, this child not being baptized, will not 
have received ordination, and consequently, all those 
whom lie may have ordained will have received noth- 
ing ; and that thus there will be in this great city 
neither sjicrament nor penance nor eucharist. since 
these cannot exist without ordination, nor ordination 
without a true bishop, nor any bishop, if he has not 
been previously baptized ; and thus, by the malice of 
a single minister, a million sacraments will be rendered 
nugatory." 

Comment on the above is unnecessary. Instead, then, 
of the Uoman Catholic Church being an ark of safety 
for those who take refuge therein, those who do so 
should nither ask themselves. Ts there even the leiist 
hope of my salvation ? 

On the 7th of December, l(i'JU, Tope Alexamler \'III. 
issued a bull, in which he not only cursed, but even 
excommunicated every one who should say that bap- 



DOCTRINE OF INTENTION. 203 

tism is valid if the priest declares internally thut it is 
not his intention to do what the Church does. This 
bull is contained in the ''Bullar : Rom./' T. XII., p. 
67. 

Now the farther question arises as to what is the in- 
tention which the priest must have in order to make 
his administration of the sacraments valid. And here 
comes in another tissue of senseless disputations— just 
those kind of disputations which St. Paul has so plainly 
condemned— and the salvation of the poor Roman 
Catholic has to depend on the intention of the priest, 
while no one knows exactly in what this intention con- 
sists. At best, all that Rome says is, that it is so 
doubtful that we must trust to the mercy of God to 
make right what the priest does wrong. This at least 
appears to be the way in which the best theologians try 
to get out of what they cannot deny to be a stupendous 
difficulty ; and after all, why not trust in the mercy of 
God first, instead of last ? 



JVOTB ON 

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC DOCTRINE OF INTENTION. 

The Roman Catholic doctrine of Intention is of such 
grave importance that I add this note here instead of plac- 
ing it at the end of the volume, where it may not be so 
carefully noticed. When Mr. Lea had concluded his series 
of papers on the Roman Catholic doctrine of Intention 
which were pubhshed in the Independent, Professor Mess- 
mer, of the Roman Catholic University of Washington, 
replied in the same paper. Now this reply is notable. In 



904 WHAT HOME TEACHES. 

the llrst place it is notable on account of the author. Rome 
always puts up hor host man to nuM'ta forniidal)l«M>pi>onont, 
and it is tlear liiat a professor in this new university is a 
man of weight. Professor Messmer says that Mr. I>«'a " has 
missed his mark," but how or in what manner he does not 
»ay. 

In fac t this article is simply an ailmission of a fact which 
cannot be denied, and a reiteration of the old story that we 
are not to arpue such subjects or any subject, but simply to 
believe what the Church teaches, and to trust our salvation 
to her. Here are extracts verbatim from the professor's 
reply, which will prove what I state. He says: 

•' Neither the real ditficulty of the case (the doubt 

whethe.' any Roman Catholic priest has orders, or is a priest), 
nor Mr. Lea's c xa^gerat«'d conclusions are anytliinj^ new to 
Catholic theolo)4:ians. In fact the main ditliculty in regard 
to the being certain of the valid ministration of the sacra- 
ments is as old as the sacraments themselves — as old as the 
Church." 

What an amazing admission ! No one then can be sure 
whether he has or has not received absolution, or any other 
sacrament of the Ronuin Catholic Church, because no one 
can be sure that the priest or the Pope is a priest or a Pope. 
And yet the eternal salvation of the poor Romanisti> depends 
on this tremendous uncertainty. Looking at the matter 
from a mere common-sense point of view, there is certainly 
a strong probability that there is not to-day one priest or 
one bishop in the Roman Catholic Church who is really 
such. Lt)ok at the far-reaching consetpiences of even one 
lapse in the link. Re.nember that it has nothing to do with 
a mere succession which could be proved historically. Only 
(iod can know whether a priest has the intention which the 
Church of Rome declares to be necessary to the valid ad- 
ministration of the sacrament. If even one fails, look at the 
result. His failure affects genei*ations yet unborn, to the 
very end of time. Ix^t us suppose, for example, that one 
priest in the sixth century failed to have the right intention 
when he baptized a child — a matter very likely tohaveha|>- 
|)ened — and that this child eventually became a priest and 



hOCTRliSIE Of' INTENTION. S05 

then a bishop. He had no orders, and every priest whom he 
ordained was not ordained, because his ordainer had not 
orders ; and of course all the priests ordained by the bishops 
who had been made priests, or received any sacrament from 
a man not capable of giving it, were all equally disabled 
from administering the sacraments. And look how far- 
reaching and how absolutely conclusive this is, and say, 
can you be sure that any individual priest is a priest, when 
he may have been ordained by a bishop who was incapable 
of administering the sacraments ? And this is what comes 
of departing from the simple gospel of Christ, which sends 
us direct to him who can never fail us. 

The only answer to this difficulty which the professor 
admits — for indeed he could not deny it — is this (I give his 
own words here also) : " Do you think that in the Church of 
God her divine Founder left no safeguards, or that in his 
omniscience and infinite power he cannot remedy the harm 
possibly done by an unfaithful minister?" Now this is 
merely begging the question. The Church of Rome teaches 
in the plainest and most positive manner that no one can 
administer the sacraments which are necessary to salvation 
unless the person has been validly ordained. It is not a 
question of the power of God, but of the teaching of the 
Church. The Church teaches a certain doctrine. It is no 
use for the Church to fall back on the mercy of God when 
she declares that he will have no mercy, except under cer- 
tain conditions which she has expressly specified. Either 
the sacraments are necessary to salvation, or they are not 
necessary. Rome should be consistent. But in every diffi- 
culty Rome falls back on that entity of her own manufacture, 
the Church. The professor admits the truth of Mr. Lea's 
statements and even confirms them, but he simply uses that 
style of evasion which is the one and only refuge of Rome 
when she is called on to explain her many inconsistencies. 

It is amusing also to note with what ingenuity the pro- 
fessor evades the real question at issue. This is a common 
resource with Roman Catholic controversialists, and it is 
one against which Protestants should be warned. Indeed, 
there are few who are fit to cope with Rome, for there are 



806 WHAT ROME TK ACHES. 

few wlio would suspect her many devices for concealing 
facts wliich sho knows will ti'Il ai;aiiist her, and which 
nevertheless she cannot deny, herause they are so plain, if 
she is brought face to face with them. 

Ti»e question here is just this, that if it can be proved that 
even one priest hits not been lawfully ordained, because his 
consecrator had not a rig-ht intention, the consetjuences are 
so far-reachin*^ tiiat Ihoy must invalidate the sacraments 
in the case of thousands, and in generations yet unborn. 

In answer to this tlie professor simply argues that such 
cases are rare, and that if they happen the Church will in 
some mysterious way supply for them. But this is just 
what the Church teaches she cannot do ; and one case of a 
priest, as we have said, is fatal to such an extent that it 
would be impossible even to estimate the consequences; 
consequences which are all the worse because the cause is 
unknown, and therefore there cannot be a remedy. And it 
is to such a system as this that the Romanist intrusts his 
eternal welfare ! 

It must be remembered that Rome insists, before all 
things, on the necessity of her sacraments ; and if they are 
not validly administered they are not sacraments. If the 
child is not validly baptized he is simply a pagan ; and he 
cannot receive any other sacrament, even if the other sacra- 
ments are validly administered. If he becomes a priest his 
orders are not valid, and all the sacraments which he ad- 
ministers are invalid. The whole (juestion deserves a care- 
ful study, if only as a warning as to the results of human 
interference in divine things. When man would find a 
scheme to save himself he only makes a scheme to destroy 
himself. No Roman Catholic can tell to-day whether the 
Po|>e is lawfully Po[>e or not, simply because he cannot tell 
whether the Pope was lawfully baptized or not. If the 
priest who baptized the Pope had not the " intention" which 
the Church requires, the Pope was not baptized. If he was 
not baptized, no matter what right intention he may have 
had in becoming a priest, and no matter what right inten- 
tion the bishop who ordained him may have had, he is not 
a priest, and of course he is not Pope. 



DOCTRINE OF INTENTION. 207 

The origin of all this difficulty dates far back. It was a 
Donatist heresy that baptism was'invalid when administered 
by tliose who returned to paganism, tlie value of the rite of 
baptism being thus made to depend on the character of the 
person who administered it. St. Augustine combated this 
with all his eloquence. It was really the beginning of the 
curious Roman casuistry on the subject of the intention of 
the ministrant of any sacrament. The Council of Trent 
declared under an anathema that "intention" is essential 
for the validity of a sacrament. That is, baptism, for ex- 
ample — which is tlie foundation of all the sacramental system 
of Rome — is not valid unless the person who baptizes has a 
right "intention," which is the "intention" the Church 
requires. 

Let me add one earnest word to Christian people. Here 
you hav^e in your midst a vast multitude of your fellow- 
creatures, of those for whom Jesus died. What are you 
doing to help them to a knowledge of Christ ? Do not, I 
pray you, sa3% *'Am I my brother's keeper?" God says 
you are. God has given you a light which they are denied ; 
yet it is in j-our power to give them this light. Are you 
keeping them in darkness by your silence, or by your fears 
of some imaginary evil to yourself if you speak openly for 
God ? I am very far from advocating aggressive attacks on 
our Roman Catholic brethren, but there is a wide difference 
between aggressive attack and faithfulness to truth. Will 
not God require from you an account of these souls, some 
of wiiom may be of your own household, if you refuse to 
enlighten them in the darkness in which they are perishing ? 



CHAPTER X. 

W II A T U O M K DOES. 

TnK title of this cluipter inuy seum singular, but a 
brief explanation will show the necessity of the contents. 
It is often said, and the idea is naturally very mucli 
encouraged by Uonie, that the Konum Catholic Churcli 
is not what it once was. Even Kunumists who are dis- 
posed to be liberal, as many are in the present day, tell 
their Protestant friends that Konie has changed ; that 
she caunot now do, and would not do if she could, 
what was done in the '^dark " ages. In view of this 
constantly reiterated statement it is very important 
to show from well-authenticated sources what Ilome is 
doing to-day ; to show that she has not changed her 
mode of action. 

It must be remembered that Kome acts on the prin- 
ciples which she claims to be infallible. She always 
lias declared, for example, that she has a right to tem- 
poral sovereignty. She will soon declare that she ha.s 
a divine right to rule all nations, and to be the king of 
all peoples. In fact, though this doctrine is not yet 
taught as j)Ositively of faith, it would be easy to show 
that it is practically believed to be such. Now the acta 
which proceed from the enforcement of this doctrine, 
which is at once so absurd and so contrary to the 
Christian religion, are simply the acts which Rome 
must do in order to act up to her creed. When Rome 
interferes in i>olitics, for example, she is simply carrying 



WHAT nOMFi DOES. 209 

out that which she teaches in her catechism, as I have 
shown, where she claims the right to rule all matters, 
political and social as well as religious. But Rome 
knows well that the Protestant public, while willing to 
go to extremes in meeting her demands for religious 
freedom, will draw a line at her claim for political 
power. Hence the extreme anxiety of the wily cardi- 
nals of that Church which is above all things a Church 
of diplomacy, to hide from Protestants her political 
doings. It is my object to bring them to light. This 
is a question on which, for several reasons, I am anx- 
ious not to be misunderstood. I do not intend, when 
speaking of the power which Rome wields in politics, to 
refer to mere party politics. I do not mean that Rome, 
for example, works for the Liberal or the Conservative 
in England, or for the Democrat or the Republican in 
the United States. What Rome aims to do is some- 
thing very much more important. She aims to use all 
parties for the advancement of the Church ; and in 
doing this, again let it be said, she is only acting on the 
principles which she has again and again announced. 
Hence, if the world is deceived by Rome, the world has 
only itself to blame for the deception. Certainly Rome 
does her best to deceive the world, but at the same 
time Rome has never denied her dogmatic assertions as 
to her right to rule. She believes practically that the 
end justifies the means. She tells you that she has the 
right to govern you. She may choose her own means to 
obtain this right. Instances are passing daily before 
our eyes which prove all this, if only men and women 
would pause a moment to consider them. 

Rome interferes openly and boldly in politics in coun- 
tries where she can do so because of the ignorance or 



210 1 \ 'I FA T n OMf-: TEA CITES. 

fears of tlic people ; and it is not a compliment to 
our boasted civilization that Rome finds lier most obe- 
dient slaves in those r'ountries wliere tliere is an open 
Bible, or at least where there should bo an open Bible, 
because the Christian religion is, at least by courtesy, 
the religion of the governing powers. Xor is it to our 
credit that Koine is able to do the most daring deeds 
of jK)litical interference just in tliose very lands where 
liberty is supposed to flourish most largely, while in the 
countries once debased by the imperious government 
of Rome, she dare not interfere with a vote or denounce 
a voter. 

In some very plain and ringing words Jjord Salisbury 
hiis called attention in England to the outrageous con- 
duct of the Roman Catholic bishops and priests in Irish 
politics. Here are his words ; they are well worth put- 
ting on pernument record . But it may be asked, if such 
attempts were made in the United States, is there even 
one public man who would dare to utter such a protest? 
Rome does not need to interfere in politics in thiscoun- 
try, because she lias it well under control through her 
many wire-pulles in the siiloon and the senate. 

At the annual meeting of the Primrose League, held 
in London, April 21, 1891, Lord Salisbury made the 
following indignant protest against the interference 
of Rome in politics : 

** Could they imagine,'' continued Lord Salisbury, 
** the Archbishop of Canterbury summoning the Protes- 
tant clergy to resolve upon a change in leadership of the 
Conservative party? (Laughter.) lie would certainly 
demur at such an exercise of influence, and he would 
not be alone in demurring. Imagine an English 
(clergyman denouncing from the altar every liberal in 
his parish, and the London clergy leading their submis- 



WHAT ROME DOES. 211 

sive flocks to the polls under threats of spiritual conse- 
quences in case they refused. In Gre:it Britain this 
was impossible. Yet the English electorate was asked 
to place Ireland under this hybrid secular-ecclesiasti- 
cal power. In so doing they would place their breth- 
ren of the north of Ireland under a novel, monstrous 
power from which they would receive no mercy." 

I am afraid it will be thought a hard saying if I 
place it on record, that one of the things which Rome 
** does " is to deceive deliberately those who ask what 
are her teachings. If I can prove that this is true — 
it is indeed necessary that it should be known, and tl;at 
Protestants should be warned, and warned earnestly, 
against such deception — if I can prove that this 
statement is true, it adds one more to the many grave 
charges which we are obliged to malTe against Rome ; 
and it is one more reason why Christian people should 
be warned, lest, if they encourage her, they may be 
made partakers of her plagues. 

Now it is but natural for Protestants, when they 
wish for information as to the real teaching of the 
Church of Rome, to ask a Roman Catholic friend, or 
servant, to read some Roman Catholic book which is 
recommended to them by a Roman Catholic friend as 
a sure exponent of the teaching of Rome. Yet noth- 
ing is more thoroughly deceptive than such sources of 
information. The deception is all the more dangerous 
because there is no reason to expect it. But the same 
principle which necessitates the refusal to read the 
Bible, necessitates concealing the real teaching of the 
Roman Catholic Church, because such teaching, if 
clearly explained to Christian people, would at once 
make them denounce the doctrines of Rome. Roman 
Catholic priests who speak in public insist very strongly 



210 1I7/.1 r nOME TEA CHKS. 

on till' necessity of " Christian " education for tlieir 
people. The confiding Protestant believes tliat the 
(listingiiisliod prelate is sincere, and that by Christian 
teucliing he means tlie teaching of Clirist and liis 
Ajwstles. lUit his meaning is far otherwise. It need 
only be nsked if Christian people can call tlie teaching 
which we have quoted aljove Christian ; and yet this is 
what these prelates call C'hristian teaching, which they 
must and do tearh to their people. 

Again, such persons are very emphatic in their ex- 
pressions of admiration for liberty, as granted by the 
Constitution of the United Stiites. Hut the liberty to 
which they refer is the liberty whicli this Constitu- 
tion allows them to exercise in actually and very 
practically controlling the liberty of Protestants. I 
have said before, but the importance of the subject 
justifies me in some repetition, that Konumists deny 
that they put Mary in any way or in any sense in tlie 
place of Christ ; but I have given proof that tliey do so, 
and that doing so is an essential part of their religious 
belief, and a most important part. Now many of the 
statements in Cardinal Gibbons' book are either half 
truths or a distinct concealment of truth as regards the 
teaching of liis Cliurch. Hence, Protestants are 
thoroughly deceived, and the deception is all the more 
effectual berause they have no reason to suspect it ; be- 
cause, in fact, it is just the very hist thing which they 
have a right to expect. 

I believe myself that the great majority of Roman 
Catholics lionestly believe that they do not worship 
Mary, and yet a glance at the books which they use 
and at the i)ractices in which they indulge, will show to 
any mind which is not self-deceived or blinded by early 



WHA T R OME D OES. 213 

prejudice, that Mary is very really and unmistakably 
worshipped by the Roman Catholics. There are many 
persons who do not realize what they believe, because 
they have all their lives taken certain things for grant- 
ed, and have never investigated or examined for them- 
selves. It is undoubtedly a great kindness to the Ro- 
manist to call his attention to what Roman Catholic 
teaching really is ; to ask him to see for himself if 
you are not justified, for example, in saying that Rome 
teaches him to look to Mary as a saviour. But in such 
discussion you must be firm and keep strictly to facts. 
If you begin to discuss you will find that your friend 
will do his best to evade and change the subject of dis- 
cussion. You must gently and with Christian love 
keep him to the point. 

For example, you can say ^^ Here is the Scapular Book. 
Do you wear the scapular ? Has not 5^our Church 
authorized the statement that the Virgin Mary will 
save every one who wears it ; that she will descend 
into purgatory the Saturday after his death and release 
him ?'' You must call his attention to the statements in 
the *' Glories of Mary," extracts from which we have 
given in this book, and ask him, *^ Is not this putting 
Mary in the place of Christ ?" Then let the question 
remain and sink into his mind, and you will do far 
more to help him to the truth than by violent argu- 
ment or denunciation. 

Remember what a terrible wrench it is to the poor 
Romanist when he first begins to doubt his Church. 
The firm ground on which he stood is shaken under 
him, and for a time, until he realizes how he has been 
deceived, and finds his rest and his refuge in Christ, 
he will suffer more than you can ever know. 



21 1 \yHAT ROME TEACUES. 

When ho can no longer deny the statements which 
you placo before liiin, he will sjiy tluit Uorniin Catholics 
are not obliged to bi'lieve all these things. This is a 
favorite way to evade a difficulty. But you must point 
out to him that this is not true. If he does not believe 
in the infallibility of the Pope ho is not a Catholic. 
If he does believe it, he must believe and accept all 
these doctrines as true, and as infallibly tru<', because, as 
we have shown above, these doctrines and this devotion 
to the Virgin Mary are solemnly declared to be true by 
several popes. 

You must bear in mind also that the Roman Catho- 
lic has not been allowed to reason about or investigate 
his religion. He is simply taught that he is to believe 
so and so, and that if he does not believe he will be 
damned. Hence it is difficult indeed to get a Roman 
Catholic to make even the least investigation, or to in- 
quire for himself what the doctrines are to which he has 
given all his life a passive and unintelligent acceptance. 

We liavo alluded to the untrustworthy character of 
the statements made in Roman Catholic books, and 
most surely Cardinal Gibbons has been a great offender 
in this matter. His book is written for Protestants 
who had a right to expect better things from him. 
We give one siimple of what Rome ''does" in this 
matter from his *' Faith of Our Fathers.*' Ho knows 
well, none better, that if Protestants suspected that 
Rome worshipped Mary, as she does, there would be an 
end of their toleration of Rome. His explanation at 
once misleads the Protestant and denies the doctrine of 
the Church. We must suppose that he consiilered that 
the end justifies the means. Certainly the end has been 
gained to an extent that he could scarcely have hoped, 



WHA T R OME D OES. 215 

for his name has become a household word for liberal- 
ity and beneficence, and it is supposed naturally that 
whatever doctrinal statements he makes must be cor- 
rect. 

At page 282 of his famous book we find the following 
statement: ''There are expressions addressed to the 
saints in some popular books of devotion, which to 
critical readers may seem extravagant. But they are 
only the warm language of affection and poetry, and 
are to be regulated by our standard of faith. A heart 
tenderly attached to the saints will give vent to its feel- 
ings in the language of hyperbole, just as an enthusias- 
tic lover will call his future bride his adorable queen, 
without any intention of worshipping her."' A more 
disingenuous argument could scarcely have been framed. 
The cardinal says that such expressions are to be regu- 
lated by *'our standard of faith. ^' Be it so; this is 
just what we have said. Prayers addressed to the Vir- 
gin Mary which are autliorized by the Church are most 
certainly the expression of her faith, and it is just such 
prayers which are most plainly idolatrous, because they 
invoke Mary as a saviour. There is no ^' hyperbole " 
here ; the words are as plain as words can be, and cer- 
tainly there is no possible comparison between language 
used by a 'Mover" and language authorized in the 
most solemn manner by the Church What we con- 
tend is, that the Church has authorized this idolatrous 
worship of Mary, and we have proved this. It is a cruel 
deception for Protestants to have such statements as 
the above placed before them, on the authority of one 
whom they could have no reason to doubt. 

Again he declares that only Catholics ''honor" 
Mary. I maintain that only Protestants honor her, for 



*J16 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

it is not giving her honor to put hur in u i)osition in 
which God has never placet! her, and to claim for her 
the authority and power wliich belongs only to her 
divine Son. The Scripture tells us plainly that thtrc 
is only one mediator. Does it give honor to Mary to 
give her a place which Scripture declares she cannot 
take? 

St. Paul says, in his Epistle to Timothy : " For there 
is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the 
man Christ Jesus " (I Tim. ii. 5). 

Which is right ? Which shall we accept ? The dec- 
laration of the inspired Apostle or the declaration of the 
Church of Kome ? There is one mediator, so there is 
neither place nor need for another. One mediator, so 
it is an insult to his power and to his love to put any 
other in his place, or to teach that there is a need for 
any other. 

Yet Rome has dared to teach her children to say, 
**0 my Queen, be my advocate witli thy Son, whom I 
iare not approach'' (*' Glories of Mary," New York 
edition, page 153). Is this *' hyperbole "? If it is, it 
is blasphemous hyberbole, which Rome should be 
jishamed to authorize. If it is not hyperbole, then it 
is divine truth. What a predicament for an infallible 
Church ! On the siime page there is a prayer called the 
Mcmarore, from the first word of the original Latin. This 
prayer the cardinal has repeated probably thousands of 
times. It is a prayer said every day by Catholics, and 
given daily by priests as a penance to their j>enitents. 
This prayer commences thus : *' Remember, most merci- 
ful Mary, that no one in any age was known to have fled 
to thee for help and found himself abandoned.'' Thus 
is Mary put in the place of God, as the one to whom the 



WHA T R OME D OES. 2 1 7 

poor sinner can never appeal in vain. Is this hyper- 
bole ? If it is, how awfully responsible is Rome for 
allowing her people to reciie it, day after day, as a 
solemn truth. If it is not hyberbole, what shall be 
said of the excuses made by the cardinal for Roman 
Catholic worship of Mary ? 

Before I pass to another subject I would call atten- 
tion to tlie poor excuse made for putting Mary in 
the place of Christ. This excuse is very plainly stated 
in the words quoted above The smner is taught by 
the Church to ask Mary ''to be his advocate with her 
Son, whom lie dare not approach.^' What a blasphe- 
mous contradiction to the express words of Scripture I 
The smner is told that he dare not approach Jesus, 
who died for him, and who lives forevermore to make 
intercession for him. It is to Mary he must go to make 
intercession for him . 

Yes, Rome does well to keep the holy Scriptures from 
her people, lest they should learn to go to Jesus, and 
to trust him so much that they would never think of 
going to Mary ; and what would then become of the 
teaching of the infallible Church ? Then indeed 
Rome's occupation would be gone, for there would be 
no more need of masses, or saints, or Marys, to come 
between the soul of the sinner and the Saviour. What 
a cruelty it is to the poor Romanist to teach him such 
blasphemy as this, on the infallible authority of the 
Church, that he '' dare not '' approach Jesus ! N'o 
wonder that the Bible is a forbidden book. If it was 
once read the words of the Apostle Paul might sink 
into some sad and discouraged heart. He did not 
send his disciples to Mary. These are the blessed words 
of St. Paul : " For we have not an high priest which can- 



218 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

not Ih» touchcil with the feeling of our infirmities : but 
wus in nil points tempted like iis we are, yet without sin. 
I^et us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, 
that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in 
time of need" (Hcb iv. 15, 16). 

'i'his 18 the tetvching of the Scriptures. We are to 
come "boldly" to Jesus, that wo may find help in 
time of need. Xot one word is there here of fear, or 
ji]>proaching him through an intercessor. Xot one wonl 
of going to Mary, or one hint that she or any other 
human being would be more merciful than he who died 
for us on the cross. Let it be observed also that the 
words quoted above are no mere sentimental expression. 
They are the words of a prayer whicli Komc teaches 
her children to repeat. 

"We now proceed to show how Rome acts as regards 
the Bible. We have shown that she condemns the 
reading of Scripture. We will now show that she 
acts on this principle at the present day as much as she 
did in past ages. Let us say again, it is no wonder that 
Protestants are deceived by books written by Roman 
Catholic bishops whom they could not suspect of 
disingenuousness. But once this is fully shown, a 
very grave responsibility will rest with the Christian 
jxiople if they are deceived any longer. In fact they 
cannot be deceived when facts are placed before them, 
though they may not have the courage to act on their 
convictions. In this case they are fur more accountable 
than Romanists who are and can be deceived. We have 
already given ample evidence as to the teaching of the 
Church of Rome in regard to the reading of the Bible. 

But it is not merely that Rome forbids the reading of 
the Bible, she has plainly declared that the Bible is a 



WHAT ROME DOES. 219 

book of little value. Again I must ask Protestants to 
judge Rome, not by ex-parte statements which are 
miule to deceive the public, but to judge her by her 
official statements. We have called attention to the 
statement of Cardinal Gibbons that priests are obliged 
to read the Bible, which is so misleading because the 
book which they are obliged to read is not the Bible, 
though it contains some few extracts from it, which I 
suppose is considered by his Eminence sufficient to 
justify his statement. 

But it will be remembered also that I have quoted 
from the authorized catechisms used in this country, 
to prove that the Bible is not the source from which 
Romanists learn what they are to h: lieve for salvation ; 
they are to take their belief from the Church. But it 
is not only in her books of instruction and in her 
catechisms that such doctrine is taught. We extract 
the following noteworthy statement from the Catholic 
Review of Xov. 8, 1890. The editor quotes from a 
paper written by Professor Sicard, and endorses em- 
phatically the following statement : ^' It is a wise doc- 
trine of the Church, whch does not allow her children 
to fall into error {sic) by reading any version of the 
Bible, or by taking any meaning from it. The Bible 
does not hold the same position m the Catholic Church 
which it does in the Protestant. Catholics believe that 
the priests of the Church have been delegated to teach 
the lessons of the Bible, and that they alone are the in- 
terpreters ; that the Church in her catechisms fully 
provides the truths which all should know, leaving the 
holy Book to the appointed instructors of the people's 
faith." 

Now no language could be plainer than this, and 



2J0 I \ If. I /' A' OME TEA CHES, 

Protestants who still believe that Rome is a Christian 
Church which li.is basetl her belief on the Christian 
Bible, shouUl no longer bo deceived. Rome, for all 
practical purposes, does not believe in the Bible; and the 
sooner this sad fact is realized the better, both for 
Rome and for Christian peoi)le. If the Bible told in 
favor of Rome, we may be well assured that Rome would 
quote the Bible and circulate it as earnestly as she now 
tries to depreciate its divine authority ; but what is 
her religion based upon, if she cannot bear the light of 
God's own word, and if she is driven to deny its value? 
Which are we to choose, the religion whicli requires 
the withdrawal of the Bible, or the religion which re- 
quires the acceptance of the Bible ? There are two 
kinds of Christianity, the Christianity of the Bible and 
the Christianity of the Roman Catholic ( hurch. **'By 
their fruits ye shall know them ." It is true that all so- 
Ciilled Christians are not Christian in their lives — that 
is, they do not act up to what they profess to believe — 
but their professions are right ; it is their actions which 
are wrong. In the case of the Church of Rome both 
the professions and the actions are wrong. The pro- 
fession that Christ gave a superior authority to the 
Church, and ordained that it should be the interpreter 
of the Bible is unscriptural ; and the result of belief in 
this unscriptural teaching is simply tliat those wlio be- 
lieve it are evil in their lives, in i)ro portion to the 
earnestness of their belief. Look at Italy ; look at 
Spain ; look at ^^exico ; see the fruit of the teaching of 
Rome. Look, we might well say, at this country, and 
sec the moral effect on those who have been taught 
from childlnxMl that the Church is above the Script- 
ures. They are sure of siilvntioii. no matter what kind 



WHA T n ONE D OES. 221 

of life they have led, because they expect salvation 
through the Church, and practically not through 
Clirist; hence they do not feel obliged to live as Christ 
has commanded. They can, for all practical purposes, 
live as they please, so as they die as the Church pleases. 
Now it may be said that Rome does not teach this doc- 
trine. I know that she protests loudly that she does not 
teach it ; but of what avail are protests in the face of 
facts ? 

Facts all go to show that wherever Rome has undis- 
puted sway, the result is a demoralized and degraded 
people. 



CHAPTER XT. 

ROMK'S INTEKFERENCE in rOLITICAL MATTERS. 

Rome loudly and ceaselessly declares that she does 

not interfere in politics. Yet Rome teaches distinctly 
that she has a right, and a divine right, to do so. 
Hence she would simply stultify herself if she did not 
interfere. It is amazing how completely Rome has 
blinded Protestants as to her real character. It is 
surely a ** strong delusion,'* and a most fatal one. 
Protestants have before their eyes not only the bulls 
and other pajial utterances in which Rome claims all 
power both on earth and in heaven, but they have also 
the evidence of every-day life that Rome rules and 
regulates the politics of the world. Yet they will not 
believe the evidence before them if a priest or bishop 
tells them that Rome **does not interfere in politics,*' 
or if some Catholic author writes some platitudes whicli 
he has arranged for their perusal, but which are not 
the teaching of his Church. 

Every Roman Catholic bishop in America talks about 
** liberty '' when such talk will impress the unsuspicious 
Protestant. We have already shown the kind of "liberty" 
which Rome desires, and which she extols. It is the 
liberty to enslave you. I>ook well at what Rome " does " 
if you would be wise in time, and compare what she 
"does'* with what she says. Rome dare not do in 
Italy what she docs in New York. No wonder then 
tliat she admires the free institutions of this country. 



HOME'S INTERFERENCE IN POLITICS. J22;J 

Now Rome is perfectly consistent in her demand for 
the control of the civil government. If her teachmg is 
true, that there is no salvation outside the Church, she 
is bound to compel all to belong to the Church, even if 
she has to call in the civil power to help her to enforce 
submission. This power she has ever invoked and util- 
ized. She aims now, quietly, but none the less effective- 
ly, to obtain civil power in this country, her last refuge ; 
and she has already obtained more than she could have 
dared to hope for a few short years ago. 

Remember the words of Cardinal Gibbons' authorized 
catechism: *' Jesus Christ has said, ^ He that despiseth 
you [the x\postles and their lawful successors in the 
Catholic Church] clespiseth me.' ^' Then the writer says 
it will be better for Sodom and Gomorrha than for those 
who reject Christ by rejecting his Church. Later it 
is said that the greatest grace bestowed on '^ us " ' (Roman- 
ists) is that of being called to the ^'true faith in the 
Catholic Cliurch, because without this grace we cannot 
have the least hope to be saved." [The italics are in the 
original.] 

This is the belief of Catholics ; and holding such be- 
lief they are bound, according to their idea of conscience, 
to use force and violence to exterminate heresy. 

Tli£ duty of Rome, therefore, is to obtain political con- 
trol everywhere, so that she may secure, sooner or later, 
the complete government of every country. Hence it is 
that the Pope is constantly paying compliments to the 
people of America, in return for the freedom which he 
enjoys in this country. 

In the year 18S0 a work was written by the Roman 
Catholic Bishop of Peoria, Right Rev. J. L. Spalding, 
D.D., on the '' Religious Mission of the Irish People.' 



224 WHA T HOME TEA CUES. 

This work has had a large circulation amongst Ameri- 
can Catholics, ixs a work written by a bishop must always 
have, for more reasons than one. At page 13G of this 
work I5ishop Spalding says : " Pius IX., it is reported, 
was accustomed to say that only in America was he truly 
Popo." What a warning this should be to the people 
of America who are giving such power to the Churcli, 
and what a rei)roach to the nation which is bowed be- 
fore an effete ruler whose own subjects, on bis own 
showing, have found his rule so intolerable that they 
will no longer submit to it ! 

But there is yet another proud boast at page 13T. 
Bishop Spalding says: '* It is deserving of notice, too, 
that the Catholic bishops are the only class of men in 
the republii' who exercise real power and at the same 
time hold office for life." In fact, in a country whicli 
prides itself on its freedom, Rome boasts that there alone 
she truly governs ; and in a country which protests 
against permanence of office or the acceptance of titles 
from foreign powers, Rome holds office permanently, 
and prides herself on having and using the titles of a 
foreign court. 

We may remark, in passing, that at page 159 this 
bishop siiys : " 1'he condition of the Italians in the 
United States cannot but fill the heart of a Catholic 
with bitter thoughts.'* Yet the Church to which this 
bishop belongs craves for more power in America, to 
make the Catholics of America such as the Italian Cath- 
olic has become under Papal rule. 

The bishop remarks shar})ly on the Protestant spirit 
of the founders of this j^reat republic, but he thank- 
fully admits that Rome has triumplicd over it ; yet 
at page 211 he states that "one (secular) coloniza- 



HOME'S INTERFERENCE IN POLITICS. 225 

tion society is worth a hundred St. Vincent de Paul 
societies." So much for unconscious admissions of the 
failure of Roman Catholic religious orders. 

Xow let me call attention to several recent circum- 
stances which show that Rome is to-day actively pur- 
suing her policy of controlling public affairs in this 
country, which she has announced above. And let it 
be noted that each time she obtains a victory she scores 
not one but many triumphs. Xo one, unless he has 
been familiar with the inside life of the Church of 
Rome, can tell the capital which Rome makes of every 
concession, or of every toleration, or how she entrenches 
herself more and more strongly after each successful 
attempt to control matters outside of her own Church. 
Remember that power is the one thing which Rome 
desires, that she will make every sacrifice to obtain it 
even in the smallest matters, and that she will never let 
go what she has once obtained. 

A meeting of the priests of Xew York was convened 
lately by Archbishop Corrigan to discuss the case of 
those who were followers of Dr. McGlynn, and who at- 
tended his meetings. It is very well known that a con- 
siderable number of the priests of the diocese, and in- 
deed of priests all over the country, are m very active 
sympathy with the Doctor, and consider that he has 
been unjustly excommunicated. This state of things 
is of course very grating to episcopal authority; and as 
episcopal authority has the power to make itself felt 
in very unpleasant ways by those who are not in perfect 
harmony with its decisions, one object of this meeting 
was to ascertain if any one would be so daring as to take 
the part of the condemned priest publicly. Such a 
state of things could only exist in the Roman Catholic 



2«6 WHA T ROME TEA CUES. 

communion, wliere meetings to disease are so called only 
by courtesy. Thesi* meetings are simply convened to 
give the outside world an appeunince of fairness which 
docs not exist. They are not meetings to discuss, 
in any sense of the word. They are meetings to ratify 
whatever the Superior declares to be his opinion. There 
is no class of men who indemnify themselves so fiercely 
in private for the constraint put upon their public ut- 
terances as the priests of the Catholic Church. This 
is a matter of which I can write from personal knowl- 
edge. I have heard priests call an ecclesiastical su- 
perior a "little puppy," as a common appellation in 
private, while they would — or rather, while they were 
compelled to — bow down before hmi in abject submis- 
sion in public. Bishops know all this well, and they 
know they can on^y keep down insubordination by the 
exercise of unlimited tyranny ; and every one who has 
had any personal experience of Iiome knows that every 
bishop must either be a tyrant or a sla-e. The slaves 
are few indeed. Xo priest dare express an opinion at 
any '* discussion " contrary to that which he knows his 
bishop to hold . lie must simply acquiesce silently, if he 
does not agree openly — which is the more frequent pro- 
cess — in what he secretly condemns. It will be remem- 
bered what rigorous punishment was inflicted on the 
very few priests who dared to expretJs their sympathy 
with Dr. McCilynn in the treatment which he met at 
the time when ho was expelled from St. Stephen's. 
Such things should not bo forgotten. Nor should tlie 
punishment meted out to Dr. Burtsell in such a cruel 
manner be forgotten. His crime was answering ac- 
cording to his conscience, when summoned to give evi- 
dence in a court of law. 



ROME'S INTERFERENCE IN POLITICS. 227 

Cut now even the liberty of Protestants is restrained, 
though as yet they cannot be punished. An announce- 
ment was made and published by the press of New 
York, that no reporter would be allowed to report Dr. 
^IcGlynn's speeches, so that the Protestant people of 
Xew Yoik are not to be given the opportunity of form- 
ing a judgment on what he has to say, and. must only 
lioar one side of the question. Could intolerance go 
further ? And yet this has passed unnoticed and un- 
reproved. The next step will be easier. Encroachment 
on the liberty of the press begins with trivial matters. 
Those w^ho desire to enslave the press dare not act too 
openly at first. But slow is sure, in this* as in other 
matters. The Bible must be suppressed because the 
Bible does not teach Romanism, and the press must be 
muzzled because if facts were known and discussed it 
would be fatal to Romanism ; and Christian men and 
women tolerate all this. 

The press is obliged also to keep absolute silence as to 
the wrongdoings of priest or sisters. The silence of 
the grave broods over all Roman Catholic institutions, 
and concerning all that is done in them. If a Protes- 
tant minister or a member of a Protestant Church is 
guilty of a fault, the whole world must know it ; and a 
thoughtful glance at the popular papers of the day will 
show that special pains are taken to hold up to scorn and 
ridicule any member of any Christian Church who has 
gone wrong. I, who read between the lines, see much 
which I know has its unconscious effect on the unthink- 
ing portion of the Protestant public. The American 
public have very little idea how much is suppressed 
which they ought to know, and which, if it did not con- 
cern Rome, would be well ventilated as sensational news. 



d88 WHAT noytK teaches. 

Roman Catholic interference in politics is further 
illustrated by the following despatch, which I cut from 
a New York daily : 

** Belfast, March .'>. — Intense excitement has been 
caused here in National circles by tlio piiljlication of a 
letter from the Kev. Patrick McAlister, Bisliop of 
Down and Connor. 

"In this communication the bishop practically ex- 
communicated all members of the Roman Catholic 
Church who support Mr. Parnell, alleging that those 
who do so become * propagators of })ublic sc^indal/ 
aiul place * themselves in the company of those to 
whom it is unlawful for the priests of that faith to 
administer tlie sacraments.' " 

The treatment of Ireland by the Koman Catholic 

Church, or rather by the Popes, since the days of 
Henry II. to the present hour, ought long since to have 
alienated the Irish people forever from Home. There 
is no doubt that they are being shaken in their faith 
not a little. It is for Christian people to see that they 
are not driven into infidelity, as the people of Italy and 
France have been — the inevitable outcome of disgust 
with Papal selfishness. 

Rome may count once too often on the slavish sub- 
mission of a people who have been her chief support, 
and who are in fact to-day almost her only supjiort. 
Rome has Siicrificcd the Irish people agiiin and again, 
with the most glaring inconsistency, to the interests of 
the English nation, to gain prestige and to help to 
regain temporal power. She always bows before tlie 
strong, when she does not play the waiting game 
of apparent friendliness and love of ** liberty." In 
Canada, Rome has already shown that she does and 
that she will control politics. The following extract is 



ROME'S INTERFERENCE JN POLITICS. 229 

taken from the New York Herald of February 23, 
1891: 

'•' I was informed by a Liberal member of Parliament 
to day that in tlie country districts the priests were for- 
bidding the people to support Mr. Laurier on pain of 
the Church's displeasure. The Liberals feel the blow 
and are straining every effort to lessen its force. 

*' Mr. Mercier, who has more influence among the 
French than any other man in the province, on ac- 
count of the favors he has received from the Pope, has 
cabled to Rome on the subject, and it is said that 
further Papal honors are to be conferred upon him. 
He is already a Knight of St. Gregory, is in receipt of 
the Pope's special benediction, and on his return from 
Rome was allowed to erect a private chapel in his resi- 
dence. 

" His friends are now anxious that he should be made 
a cardinal, as this would have a great effect upon the 
people. 

" There is no doubt that the Roman Catholic clergy 
have entered into the electoral campaign with as much 
political bias and vituperation as the laity. ^' 

And this from a later issue of the same journal : 

'^Montreal, March 2, 1891. — A monster Conserva- 
tive demonstration was held here to-night at which a 
letter was read from Archbishop Fabre, stating that 
the letter written in 1889 by Mgr. Grandin, of St. 
Boniface, Man., which the Liberals are circulating, 
was for the private information of bishops only, and 
had been stolen and published. 

''The letter from the Manitoba prelate stated that the 
Conservative government was neglecting Catholics in 
the Northwest. Archbishop Fabre said that Catholics 
had no complaint to make against the Conservative 
g »vernment, as all their demands had been complied 
with." 

Just go. When Rome for any reason does not wish 



280 U7f.tr ROME TEACHES. 

to enforce her jwlitical or other mandates publicly, she 
does 80 privately. There is not, nor lias there ever 
been, such an organization; and it is little wonder that 
it has so inucli power, and tliat she impresses the world 
with her unity and vitality. If she did not kill her- 
self from timi" to time with the dead-weight of ambi- 
tion and corruption, the world woultl never have been 
able to resist her absolute control. 

But it is not only in politics that Home rules. She 
demands to rule in everything. Even the distribution 
of relief -funds must bo under the control of the 
Church. The followiiig statement is evidence of this, 
and is also taken from the New York JlcraJd : 

" Archbishop "Walsh has written a letter, publislied 
in the newspapers of Dublin, in which lie sjiys that six 
priests, responding to an official invitation to assist in 
the administration of the Zetljind-Halfour fund, at- 
tended a meeting of the BuimulK't liciicf Committee at 
Belmullet, County Mayo ; but 14)011 k'arniiig that they 
would not be allowed to have elTcctive control of the dis- 
tribution they withdrew. The archbishoj) says that the 
same action will he taken by priests in other districts." 

The action of the Tloman Catholic Church in regard 
to the Knights of liiibor should also be placed on 
record. It is often said that, though Kome rules New 
York, she does not rule America. It might be said 
in reply that the power which rules New York controls 
America also, and that practically New York is New 
Rome. But the action of the Pope and the Roman 
Inquisition in regard to the Knights of Labor is an 
evidence that Kome rules America to an extent of 
which its people are ignorant, ( r to wliich they are in- 
difTerent. And be it remembere(l that the Inquisition 
still exists, and what is more important still, that it 



ROME'S INTERFERENCE IN POLITICS. 231 

acts. It is true that at present the Inquisition does 
not burn the lieretic ; but this is not because the In- 
quisition has changed its principles, it is because the 
Inquisition has not the power to burn at i^resent. But 
the Inquisition is not dead, and we shall see how it has 
acted in the matter of the Knights of Labor. 

The curtailment of personal liberty is not as severe 
a penalty as the curtailment of life, but the principle 
involved is just the same. The principle on which the 
Roman Inquisition acted in obliging Mr. Powderly to 
submit the rules and regulations of the American 
Knights of Labor to an Italian institution for ap- 
proval or condemnation, as the case might be, is just 
the same principle as that which executed Bruno in 
a previous century, and which angrily denounced 
any condemnation of this piece of ecclesiastical tyranny. 
The angry denunciation of the public spirit of the 
Italian people in erecting last year a statue to the 
martyred Bruno, is an evidence that Rome would again 
burn her Brunos at the stake, if she could do so safely. 
But Rome always knows just how far she can go, and 
she seldom exceeds the limits of prudence. 

The action of the Inquisition in regard to the Ameri- 
can Knights of Labor cannot be denied, because it has 
been made public through the Roman Catholic press 
of this country. Possibly Rome felt strong enough to 
boast of her control of America ; possibly Rome thought 
that her apparent liberality in the matter would obtain 
credit for her, and that the real animus of her action 
would pass unnoticed, as indeed it has done. 

Cardinal Gibbons has played the role of a * 'liberal " 
Catholic to admiration. While Archbishop Corrigan 
does the stern father, Cardinal Gibbons does the part 



233 ]\ UA r j:()M k i k. i cues. 

of the indulgent fatlier. Tlio giimo is amusing, 
though the end, when attained, may not bo a subject 
for mirtli. Some of the Uoman prelates of this coun- 
try became alarmed at the growing power of the 
" Knights,'' though they were governed and inau- 
gurated by Catholics. They proposed the sliort and 
ready and old-fashioned method of crushing them at 
once, before they obtjiined a power wliich might be 
obnoxious oven to tlieir co-religionists. 

But the cardinal saw an opportunity for forging new 
fetters for the American people, which were chains 
none tlie less because they appeared to be of silken text- 
ure. He said, " Not so, my brothers, let us appeal to 
Rome.'' He has influence there, and well-earned in- 
fluence. Diplomatic cardinals can appreciate diplo- 
macy even when they are bitterly jealous of the in- 
fluence of a *' foreigner "' in the court of Iiome. The 
end was gained all the same ; but it was gained in such 
a fashion as to secure American applause for the liber- 
ality of Kome, as shown by the action of the cardinal, 
while at the same time the power of the Inquisition 
was asserted and strengthened. 

Mr. Powderly was obliged to submit the rules and 
regulations of an American organization of working- 
men, Protestant and Catholic, for approval, or rather 
for permission to exist, to the Italian prelates and mon- 
signori of the Inquisition, and to accept their decision 
as final. Yet Fourth -of- July-orators wave the flag of 
liberty proudly and declare that they never, never will 
be slaves. Kome smiles. She has cause ; but then she 
is so liberal she allows tlie Knights of Labor and other 
political or benevolent organizations to continue their 
good works under her direction. 



ROME'S INTERFERENCE IN POLITICS. 233 

As the matter is of such importance, we give the 
facts from a Roman Catholic paper, the New York 
Freeman's Journal. 

The following is the letter of the Cardinal Prefect 
of the Sacred Congregation to Cardinal Gibbons, em- 
bodying its decree in regard to the American Knights 
of Labor : 

'' Rome, August 29, 1888. 

*'MosT Eminent and Most Rev. Lord: I have 
to inform your Eminence that the fresh documents 
relative to the Society of the Knights of Labor, which 
have been laid before the Sacred Congregation, were 
examined at its meeting held on Thursday, August 
16, of the current year. 

" Having carefully studied these documents, the 
Sacred Congregation orders that this reply be made : 
That, judging by all that has been hitherto proposed 
to it, the Knights of Labor may for the present be tol- 
erated. The Sacred Congregation only requires that 
the necessary corrections be made in the statutes of the 
organization, in order to explain what might otherwise 
appear to be obscure, or be interpreted in a wrong 
sense. The modifications should especially be made in 
those passages of the preamble of the rules which refer 
to local association ; the words which in these passages 
savor of socialism and communism must be corrected 
in such a manner as to make them express simply the 
right given by God to man, or rather to mankind, to 
acquire by legitimate means, respecting always the 
rights of property enjoyed by every one. 

'* 1 am happy to be able to inform your Eminence 
that the Sacred Congregation has praised highly the 
resolve of the bishops of the United States to take 
heed, in concert with itself, lest there creep into the 
Society of the Knights of Labor, and other similar or- 
ganizations, anything contrary to justice and honesty, 



284 WHAT ROME TEACHES, 

or not in conformity witli the instructions as given to 
the Masonic sect. 

" In contirniinf^ and supporting you in this excellent 
project, in tlit* name of the Sacred C'ongre«;ation I pray 
you to acci'j)t the assuiiinct' of our rL's})e(.'tful an(l de- 
voted sentinieiits. 

* Your Kniinence's very humble servant, 

*MoHN Cardinal Simeoni, Prefect. 

** To His Eminence Cardinal James Gibhons, 
Archbishoj) of Baltimore,^' 

The New York *s'/n/ published the condemnation by 
the Tribunal of the Roman Inquisition of the doctrine 
proposed by Mr. Henry George, abolishing private 
property in land, and giving the further direction that, 
if the Society of the Knights of Labor would be toler- 
ated by the Roman Catholic Church, they must cor- 
rect any expression of agreement with the views of Mr. 
George. The following letter from Cardinal Gibbons 
to Archbishop Elder of Cincinnati was tlie result : 

"Cardinal's Rksidence, 
*'408 iV^. Charles St., Ball i more, Sept. 'I'u 
" YoiR Grace : On receipt of the letter of which 
the enclosed is a copy, I wrote to Mr. Powderly, request- 
ing him to come and see me. He came on the 24tli 
inst , in com})liance with my invitation, and cheerfully 

fromised to make the emendations required by tlie 
loly Office, and expressed his readiness to comply at 
all times with the wishes of the ecclesiastical authori- 
ties. Very faithfully your friend in Christ. 

*'J. Card. Gibbons. 
**MosT Rev. Dr. Elder, Abp., Cincinnati.'' 

But this is not all. Would it be believed that a body 
of Roman cardinals could have the impertinence to tell 



HOME'S INTERFERENCE IN POLITICS. So.", 

the English-speaking and English-thinking men of the 
great American Republic that their organization "may 
be tolerated for the present '' ? Nothing can be done 
until certain words are altered to suit their pleasure. 
And this in the nineteenth century ! If such things 
can be done now, no statement of the claims of the 
Church, or of the abject submission of the people 
to it in the Middle Ages, should surprise us. Indeed 
there was a good deal more resistance to Rome then 
than now. Talk of the exaction and tyrannies of Im- 
perial Rome towards her colonies ! they were as nothing 
compared to the demands and exactions of modern 
Papal Rome. The Inquisition is practically established 
now in America, as Cardinal Gibbons plainly states, for 
the '^Holy Office," to which he refers in the above 
letter, is one of the names of the Inquisition. For the 
present it "tolerates;'' it will burn whenever it will 
be safe to burn. It should be observed that in all this 
business of regulating American affairs there is not one 
word of reference to the opinions of the people of 
America. As for the Government, it is simply ignored. 
It is a matter of no account. 

It should be noted that the title of cardinal is given 
as a title of temporal dignity, and that a cardinal as 
"Prince of the Church'' claims precedence of presi 
dents and princes of every nationality. Indeed, it is • ot 
long since a Roman Catholic paper declared that it was 
impossible to govern the mass of the people in a republic, 
hence the special necessity of having bishops and other 
ecclesiastics, in a country which is wholly republican, 
honored by titles which would impress the multitude. 

Another instance may be given briefly here of the 



286 WHAT ROME TEACHES, 

power wliicli Rome exercises without dispute or liin- 
(Iraiioe in teniponil afTjiirs in tlir United States. Little 
wonder that Rome lauds this republic ad fiaiuseani. 

The New York papers, or at least a few of tliem, 
reported a reniarkahle case during the first week in 
May, in which Mgr. Preston has sat as judge, jury and 
executioner. A quarrel took place between tlie Rev. 
T. J. Early, priest of rouglikeepsie, and Mr. George 
Hughes, one of his parishioners. Rome asserts and 
secures her right to forbid the laity to bring any 
ecclesiastic into the secular courts. The plain mean- 
ing of this is that Rome claims to be above the secular 
courts. It does not matter what the nature of the case 
mav be, this should be well understood. Of course 
every church has a right to decide its own affairs in 
ecclesiastical matters, but Rome lias always claimed 
that every matter is ecclesiastical, because she and she 
alone is the source of divine infallibility, and the sole 
judge in all matters political, social and scientific. 
We have shown that Rome makes this claim very clearly 
in her authorized catechisms. There was a double 
dispute in this case. A dispute about a pew, which 
might or might not be termed ecclesiastical, and a 
dispute about a mortgage on the church, which cer- 
tiiinly could not be called an ecclesiastical question. 
Rut what a tremendous power is placed in the hands 
of the Church I and, in view of the use which the 
Roman Catholic Church has always made of power 
when slie had it, what a dangerous position she is 
allowed to take without a word of expostulation! 
Every exercise of such power increiuses her claim to use 
it ; and no doubt it is simjily because Rome wants to 



nOME'S INTERFERENCE IN POLITICS. 237 

establish precedents to which she may appeal later, 
that she has allowed this case to come before the pub- 
lic. Later, when some case comes up in which mani- 
fest injustice is done by ecclesiastical courts, Rome will 
appeal to the 'liberality " of the American people, and 
declare that it is an infringement of her " liberty*' to 
forbid her to exercise powers which she has already 
been permitted to use without hindrance. 

Mr. Hughes is commanded m curt terms by this ec- 
clesiastical court of one, to make a '^ written apology 
to the priest, and beg his pardon;" the last clause be- 
ing amusingly ecclesiastical. I knew a Roman Catho- 
lic in Ireland who was compelled to stand at the door 
of a church for three Sundays in his shirt-sleeves as an 
atonement for some little trouble which he had given 
to the priest. The shirt-sleeves episode would hardly 
answer at present in this country, but the abject '' beg- 
ging of pardon " is scarcely less degrading. The money 
part of the case is apparently treated with great fair- 
ness, but all the same the interests of the Church are 
secured. 

It is probable that the world at large will never know 
what Mr. Hughes thinks of the decision. He may 
have good reasons for submission and .still better rea- 
sons for silence. But what of the freedom which all 
this promises for the coming generation ? 

In '''Essays on Religion and Literature, edited by 
Archbishop Manning, 1867," we find, pp. 416, 417 : 
" Moreover, the right of deposing kings is inherent in 
the supreme sovereignty which the Popes, as vicege- 
rents of Christ, exercise over all Christian nations." 
. . . '' These are not derived or delegated rights, 
but are of the essence of that loyal authority of Christ 



98d WHA T R OME TEA ( 'HES. 

with which his vicegerents on lurth are vested." 
When, therefore, for the common good, the Head of the 
Church exercises his supreme authority eitlier by ex- 
communicating individuals, by laying nations under an 
interdict, or by deposing kings, all Christian people 
are bound to obey his decree. 

Again, Cardinal Manning, in his sermon on the Syl- 
labus, describes the late Pope as saying to those who 
urged this Pontiff ''to be reconciled to Liberalism**: 
•' In his (Christ's) right I am sovereign. I acknowl- 
edge no civil superior ; and I claim more than tliis, I 
claim to be the supreme judge on earth, and director 
of the consciences of men, of the peasant that tills the 
field, and the prince that sits en the throne ; of the 
household that lives iii the shade of privacy, and the 
legislature that makes laws for kingdoms. I am the 
last supreme judge on earth of what is right and 
wrong." (" Sermons on Religious Subjects,*' Burns, 
Gates & Co., 1873.) 

These are not ancient sayings of the dark ages, but 
are the utterances of living men in England in the last 
half tf the nineteenth century. If Protestants are 
blind to the true significance of these words, it will 
not be because Catholics have used ambiguous terms. 
They have used as clear language as it is possible for 
masters of the English tongue to do. 

Need we point to Ireland for evidence of what Plome 
does and dares to do in this nineteenth century? She 
is, according to the report of this day on which I write, 
making another deal for the pacification of Ireland, the 
price to be the renewal of diplomatic relations with 
Rome. Irish aspirations and desires are to be sacri- 
ficed and English rule maintained in Ireland by Rome, 



ROMFTS INTERFERENCE IN POLITICS. 289 

if England will but support Rome in her efforts to re- 
enslave the people of Italy, who, wearied with her rule, 
have asserted their independence. It is to be regretted 
that Irish affairs are not better understood in this coun- 
try, where the public know just as much as the press 
allows them to know, and hear nothing of the true 
state of the conflict. 

The Irish people, who have been for years the silent 
and submissive slaves of Rome, have begun to see that 
their interests have not been the first consideration 
with Rome. Mr. Davitt and others have protested, 
but the most remarkable protest is that which has just 
been made by a devoted Catholic (March, 1891). Sir 
Charles Gavan Duffy has written a letter to the Free- 
man^s Journal in n\ hich he says that the policy of in- 
dependent opposition that Mr. Parnell has so far car- 
ried on successfully originated in 1847 with the Irish 
Confederation. Then, with the exception of two bish- 
ops, the whole Irish Catholic episcopate resisted the 
policy with all their power, and banished the priests 
to penal parishes for supporting the Independent party. 
Eventually the Independents became reduced by in- 
trigue and corruption from fifty to five members, the 
bishops condoning or approving every act of treachery. 
In conclusion Sir Charles Gavan Duffy declares that 
^^ until all this clerical interference is changed there is 
no more hope for the Irish cause than there is for a 
corpse on a dissecting-table." 

Another equally devoted Catholic, Mr. Harrington, 
M. P., in a letter to the Freeman's Joui^nal, accuses 
the prelates of deliberate duplicity in very plain terms. 
In support of his accusations he furnishes the orig- 
inal copy of a joint letter which the bishops wrote 



240 1 1 7/. 1 T J: OME TEA (. 7/y;.S'. 

to Mr. PariK'll on October 15, before the O'Shea 
trial, in which the writers vigorously condeuin Messrs. 
Dillon and O'Brien, wliose indei)endent action, they de- 
clare, is calculated to separate the moral clement from 
national })olitics. This has reference to the action 
of Messrs. Dillon and O'Brien in holding independent 
meetings and sustaining movements in sympathy with 
the former's cause in his controversy with Bishop 
O'Dwyer of Limerick, and Mr. Parnell is earnestly be- 
sought to express to the two members mentioned his 
emphatic disapproval of their course. 

Pursuing the subject further, the bishops unsparing- 
ly denounce the glaring absence of supervision of the 
columns of ruited JrtUind, even in the gravest matters 
affecting the Xatioiuil cause, and request Mr. Parnell 
to use his influence with Mr. O'Brien to the end of in- 
ducing him to abandon his course and devote his time to 
the interests of the paper, the efficacy of which, as 
a means of true expression of national opinion, has been 
greatly impaired by his neglect while treading forbid- 
den paths. 

Now the difference between the freedom in Ireland 
and the subjugation in America is simply caused by 
Protestiint opinion. In America, Protestant opinion 
sides, generally speaking, witli the Roman Catholic 
Church. Certainly the press, with perhaps one or two 
exceptions, does not uphold the Romanist. In Kngland, 
except when manifest political interests are at stake, the 
libeml Roman Catholic can rely on Protestant support. 
In England, and above all in Ireland, the public know 
what Rome is, and cannot be deceived by plausible pre- 
tensions of love of liberty. With the memory of the 
rebellion of '9vS in ilieir minds, in which Protestants 



ROME'S INTERFERENCE IN POLITICS. 241 

were rutlilessly murdered in Ireland simply because 
they were Protestants, they are not very likely to be- 
lieve that Home has changed cither her creed or her 
practices. The following extract from a speech which 
was made by the Marquis of Salisbury in February, 
1S91, and which was sent to me, will be read with in- 
terest : 

^' The heads of the Roman Catholic Church, for their 
own reasons, resolved that it was their interest that 
Home Rule should be obtained, and therefore that Mr. 
Gladstone should be gratified in the matter of Mr. Par- 
ueirs ostracism, and when they had resolved upon that 
point — they took a fortnight to resolve it, looking 
around very carefully upon all the interests that might 
be affected, but having resolved it — they applied the 
whole force of their matchless organization to carry it 
into effect ; and did you watch what the result of 
that effort was? what the tremendous odds were 
against which they had to struggle, and how up to this 
time, at least, they have succeeded ? They were fight- 
ing against a man who up to that time had commanded 
the Nationalist forces in Ireland as a despot, against the 
man who had made the whole movement of Home 
Rule, against a man who disposed of the whole of the 
American sympathies which have been so powerful in 
this question. They were fighting against him, and yet 
at a moment's notice they were able to bring the whole 
of their clerical organization to bear, and in the only 
battlefield which was fought, to sweep him from the 
field. I am not saying that I have the slightest sym- 
pathy with either side. I can see abundant grounds 
for distrusting both. But what I do ask you is to con- 
template the tremendous power of the organization 
which for the moment was revealed to view. That is 
the organization which, if you grant Home Rule, will 
govern Ireland in the future. That is the organ izat on 
beneath whose ruthless heel you are about to place the 
Protestants of the North of Ireland, who have suffered 



242 UlfA T ROME TEACHES. 

tln-ougli many loii<^ ^eiienitioiis of history from tliis 
Hntaponism, and who look upon it as tho most terrible 
fato that can await them, that their future political, 
socuil, material welfare shall be at the bid of the or- 
ganized priesthood of Ireland. It has been a puzzle to 
us why Irish society was so dislocated ; why it did not 
move in the ordinary way ; why men who had educa- 
tion seemed to have so little influence on those who 
had none, and we tiow kfKnr the reason. We now know 
that a more powerful organization, which has in every 
age set every other at deliance, was in the held before 
us, and that it had Siipped every social tie and set at 
naught every traditional alTection. We shall be mad, 
indeed, if we do not take warning from this disclosure. 
In the tempest that passed over Ireland in the autumn 
the disguise hiis been for the moment blown aside, and 
you see that the antagonist with which you have to con- 
tend is the sinister domitiatiuu ofAnhhishop Croke and 
Archbisho]) Waliih. To me at least it is a matter of 
rejoicing that this disclosure has happened. 

** When I think of that scene in Ireland where the old 
priests with their umbrellas went before, and the young 
priests with their blackthorns followed after, and when 
popular objection to the leader of yesterday was ex- 
pressed by Hinging a bag of lime in his face, I feel it 
does not exactly represent what has taken place at the 
performance of constitutional duties in this country. 
Remember these peculiarities which the Irish nation 
have shown in this temporary transient performance of 
constitutional functions are ])recisely those most fatal 
to stable and consistent ^•overnment. Whatever hap- 
pens in Ireland it runs to blackthorns." 

The Marquis of Salisbury might have added, it runs 
to j)riestly intimidation of the grossest kind. 

Now it should not bo supposed that the above is an 
exceptional case. It is very far from being such. I have 
heard the most degrading and disgraceful language 
usihI from the altar in Ireland to the poor people. 



ROME'S INTERFERENCE IN POLITICS. 243 

Sucli language dare not be used in this country or 
in England. But why? Why is it that in Ireland, in 
Canada — in the country districts at least — and in Italy, 
that the Roman Catholic population are in such a state 
of degradation that the priests can speak to them as a 
slave-driver would speak to his slaves ? The question 
is one which should not be passed over lightly. The 
time is coming when Rome will have sufficient power 
to act even here in the same manner. It is true that she 
will do her spiriting gently until she has ruled long 
enough to have educated a generation of ignorant 
slaves, who will believe in fictitious miracles and live in 
fear of the ' ' power " of the priest to convert them 
into hares and wild animals. I speak of what I know. 
Over and over again I have heard the poorer and more 
ignorant, and therefore more priest-ridden, Irish peas- 
ant express his fear, in all terrified sincerity, that the 
priest would do him *some spiritual harm of this kind 
if he disobeyed his reverence. 

That such a fear is in existence to-day I had proof 
while I was giving some addresses in Toronto last year. 
After one of my lectures a minister who had lived 
many years in Montreal came to me and confirmed 
what I had said from the platform. He said within a 
week from the day on which I had spoken he had heard 
from his servant that a priest had given out from the 
altar in the great Roman Catholic church at Montreal 
that Father Chiniquy's tongue had rotted and dropped 
out of his head, as a judgment from God for the 
'Hies '' he had told about the Catholic Church. Even 
Father Chiniquy could hardly have made a graver ac- 
cusation against the Church of Rome than the fact 
that such a statement should have been made from the 



244 WirAT HOME TEACHES. 

altiir of a lk>man Catholic church, to a people who 
were sure to believe it because the *' priest** said it. 
Tho priest must hiivo known that he was telling a de- 
li be nite falsehood. lUit what matter? The end was 
gained. This minister could not persuade liis servant 
that the statement was untrue, even when he told her 
he had seen Father C'hiniquy a few days before in pei - 
feet health. 

What value was the word or the oath of any one else 
when a priest had spoken ? 



CHAPTER XII. 

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH's ATTITUDE IIT REGARD 

TO THE MARRIAGE TIE AND THE TEMPER- 

AXCE QUESTION. 

There is no subject on which Rome is more eloquent 
than that of her supposed protection of the marriage 
tie and of woman. This is remarkable in a Church 
which has been the cause of so much degradation and 
ruin to women, by her command to her priests to ab- 
stain from marriage. Protestant ignorance of the his- 
tory of the Roman Catholic Church, and of her past 
and present condition, is much to be regretted, for it 
has enabled Rome to place herself before the Protes- 
tant public in an absolutely false light 

A sermon of Cardinal Gibbons was reported at great 
length by the New York press quite recently, in which 
he declares that Rome is the only protector of woman. 
Now it is not protecting woman to make the state of 
celibacy higher than the marriage state. Yet this is 
what Rome does, and this in the very face of Scripture, 
which has condemned Rome by anticipation for " for- 
bidding to marry," and in the face of the direct counsel 
to priests as to the manner in which they were to 
bring up their families. 

Jt is very much to be regretted that the history of the 
Roman Catholic Church is so little known. Roman 
Catholic histories would furnish all that is needed to 
show that the enforcement of the celibacy of the 



LMfi WIIAT ROME TEACHES. 

clergy was llio source, not for i\ eliort period, but for 
centuries, of the most cruel degnulation of women. 
Rut all this is fjuietly i^nonul, ami equally unknown to 
Protestants and to the Konian Catliolic laity. Strange 
that Rome needs darkness and concealment, while 
Protestantism asks loudly for the light, and needs not 
to shrink from open investigation. 

Roman Catholic historians tell us how the Popes 
of the Middle Ages at least were so far from being 
the defenders and protectors of women, that they them- 
selves led vicious lives, sinning flagrantly against virtue. 
lleniT VIII., so often utilized by Romanists ivs an argu- 
ment against the reformers, was a man of virtue when 
compared with the vices of certain Popes, and Rome 
knows this well, even while she uses the general ignor- 
ance of these things for her own purposes. 

Here are the very words of the famous Baronius, the 
Roman Catholic historian of the Middle Ages. Writing 
of the state of the Roman Catholic Church in thetentli 
century, he siiys : 

*• What was, then, the face of the Holy Catholic 
Churcli ? How exceedingly foul [quam fiedissima] was 
it, when most ]>owerful, and sordid, and abominable wo- 
men ruled at liome, at whose will the Sees were ehanged, 
bishoi)S were j)resented, and what is horrid to hear and 
unutterable, /W/.st^ Pdnliffs, their lovers, were intriidiMJ 
into the chair of Peter, who are only written in tlie 
catalogue of Roman l*ontilTs for thosiiko of marking the 
times! For who can nffirm that wf)i iUerjaUij iutnided 
by wicked women of f/iis sort were lioman Pontiffs? 
There was never any mention of the clergy electing, or 
afterwards approving. All the canons were closed in 
silence, the decrees of the PontitTs were suppressed, 
the ancient traditions were ])roscribed, and the ancient 
custom in electing the l*ope, and the sacred ceremo- 



THE CHURCH AND THE MARRIAGE TIE. ^217 

iiies, and the usages of former days, were wholly extinct. 
Thus hist, relying upon the secular power, and mad 
and stimulated with the rage of dominion, claimed 
everything for itself. Then, as it seems, Christ evi- 
dently was in a deep sleep in the ship, when these 
winds, hlowing so strongly, the ship itself was covered 
with the waves." 

Now the edition of this work from which the above 
quotation is translated was not published by a Protes* 
tant. It was published at Luca in Italy in 1603. 

A history of the celibacy of the clergy has been written 
by Mr. Henry 0. Lea. He does not deal in invectives, 
but in simple facts. No one could read that work with its 
ample evidence taken from Roman Catholic sources, and 
maintain that Rome has been the protector of w^oman. 
A great deal has been said about the veneration of the 
Church for the " Spouses of Christ." I was myself 
under the delusion for some time that Rome held the 
sisters in the highest respect and reverence. I can say 
from a long and painful experience that this is so far 
from being the case, that the sisters for the most part 
are victims to the caprices and tyranny of the priests 
and bishops. If my word is doubted, or if I am sup- 
posed to be a prejudiced witness, I need only ask the 
reader to peruse the life of any Roman Catholic female 
saint, and if after such perusal he is not convinced 
that sisters are not treated as is generally supposed, 
he must be incapable of estimating evidence. I 
could fill a volume with records taken from the 
lives of saints, written by Roman Catholics, with 
the heartless cruelty with which they have been 
treated. As to the difficulties which are placed in 
their way by bishops and others when they have tried 
to do some good work, it should be known to be be- 



348 WHAT HOME TEACHES. 

lievc'd. Indeed the Ciinonization of these saints is for 
tho most piirt founded on the 'Virtue'' wliich they 
manifested in bearing the opposition to the good works 
wliich they eventually accomplished. Rome truly 
glories in her shame. She persecutes every one who 
tries to do special work for hunumity, but when they 
are dead she proclaims her own ignorance of their 
sanctity while they were living, by canonizing them 
for what she had previously 2)ersecuted them fordoing. 
Truly the words of our divine Lord may well be applied 
to her. She is a witness to herself that her children 
have killed and persecuted the prophets (St. Matt, 
xxiii. 31). 

When Kome is charged with being a persecuting 
Church, her favorite reply or excuse is, that other 
churches have also persecuted. This is true, unhap 
pily, but there is this difference between Runian Catho- 
lic and Protestant persecution. When Protestants have 
persecuted they have acted against their religious prin- 
ciples, and against what they admit to be the teaching 
of the holy Scripture. When Pome persecutes she has 
acted on her own principles, and has simply done that 
which she claims a right to do. 

In the J^a.^for, from which we quote, at page 268, a 
very clear statement is made as to the position of the 
Catholic Church on the marriage (luestion. In the 
number of the Pastor for November, 1881, transla- 
tions are given of apostolic (Papal) letters which arc, as 
all Papal utterances, infallible. Therefore there can 
be no dispute as to what they teach. In an article on 
the legislative and coercive power of the Church in 
matters pertiiining to matrimony, we find the following : 
'• The Church declares, m no uncertain tones, in the 



THE CHURCH AND THE MARRIAGE TIE. 249 

24th session, canon 1,, of the Council of Trent, and 
proves it by reference, tliat matrimony is a sacrament ; 
that she has equal power with the Old Law, as to the 
effects of consanguinity and affinity (canon 3) ; that 
she could, and consequently can, enact prohibent and 
diriment impediments, and in doing so has not erred. 
Moreover, in canon 12 she declares that matrimonial 
matters belong exclusively to her legislation, and inter- 
ference therein is unwarrantable on the part of earthly 
potentates who, acting on the principles of the IGtJi 
century heretics, considered matrimony as a civil con- 
tract and subject to civil jurisdiction only. 

"Pius VI., m his condemnation of the acts of the 
Synod of Pistoja, proclaims the doctrine which denies 
the Church exclusive legislation in matrimonial matters 
a heretical principle. 

'*It is a dogma of Catholic belief that matrimonial 
cases, inasmuch as belongs to their spiritual character, 
are exclusively of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. 

**It is certain that all matrimonial cases are exclusively 
of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Pius VI., in his famous let- 
ter of September IG, 1788, says that it is a dogma of faith 
that matrimony is one of the seven sacraments ; hence 
the Church only can decide upon its validity ; that it 
is rash to write or speak otherwise, and that such 
language is foreign to the teaching of the Church and 
apostolic usages. He repeats the anathema launched 
by the Council of Trent against those who deny juris- 
diction to the Church in these matters ; he calls the 
interpretation which is favorable to civil interference, 
even as to taking cognizance of the mere facts in the 
case, captious ; the words being general, says the Su- 
preme Pontiff, admit of no limitation ; hence it is most 
certain and beyond doubt that the Church has the ex- 
clusive right to legislate in matrimonial affairs. It is to 
be noted thut Pius VI., in the heading of his letter, 
speaks of the power of teaching and confirming in the 
faith conferred upon him. Pius VII. reiterates this 
doctrine in his letter to the Archbishop of Mayence. 
Hence, when the civil power wishes to interfere, for the 



250 WHA T ROME TEA CUES. 

wikc of the civil offecUr, witli regard to the nullity or 
validity of marriage, the Church muBt ho always con- 
sulted in the lirst place, and her decision euhmitted to; 
not only in the essentialfi, hut also &a to the adjuncts, as 
the essence of all law denuiiids. 

** As to tho question of espousals, Pius VI. settles it. 
The Pontiff, condemning the Synod of Pistoja, says 
that the pro posit i(»n which maintains that espousals 
])n>perly so-called are civil acts is false, injurious to the 
ranons of the Church, and derogatory to her discipline." 

Nothing could be more explicit tlian the above state- 
ments as to tlie authoritative teaching of Rome on the 
marriage question. In the catechism it is taught dis- 
tinctly that marriage when not performed by a priest 
is not marriage. Hence every Christian, according to 
Rome, who is married by a minister, or by a magistrate, 
is simply living in a state of concubinage. 

If a Protestant and Romanist unite in matrimony 
and the Protestant does not renounce his whole faith, 
the marriage ceremony is not performed at tlie altar, 
and a heavy jirice is exacted for the permission to 
marry. In fact there seems to be little which Rome will 
not permit if she is well paid for permitting it. Strange 
that the payment of a sum of money can make a mortal 
sin permissible! 

Now the Roman Catholic Church cannot enforce all 
her laws at jiresent because she has not yet sufficient 
temporal power in this country. Hut let us see what 
slie docs even now ; my object in this part of the work 
being to show what Rome does at the present day. 

In the New York Il^rahl, April 27, 1S91, there was 
an article headed "Church and State in Conflict.'* In 
this article it is stated tliat the Rev. Father Creighton, 
of Riverhead, hits refused to file the records of the mar- 



THE CHURCH AND THE MARRIAGE TIE. 251 

riages performed by him with the authorities, although 
lie has celebrated a number of marriages, and has been 
repeatedly warned of his legal obligations. The article 
continues : 

** Clerk Bagshaw says that the priest on one occa- 
sion came to him and told him that he would file the 
certificates if he was paid |5 each for them. When 
Bagshaw replied that the law allowed but twenty cents 
for the filing of such records, the priest, he says, said, 

* Tut, tut, my boy, would you have me work for 
nothing?^ 

' ' Bagshaw reported the matter to the Board of 
Health several weeks ago. A sub-committee was ap- 
pointed to wait <>n Father Creighton. After an inter- 
view with the clergyman the committee reported that the 
real reason for his refusal appeared to be his belief that 
the laws of the State and Catholic Church were in con- 
flict, and that he could not consistently comply with 
the regulations of the State without violating those of 
the Church. 

" Father Creighton said that such was his belief. 
That he celebrated marriage according to the Roman 
Catholic ritual, which did not countenance divorces by 
any court of law or ecclesiastical authority. 

'^ *The wording of the record slip,' he continued, 

* says that ^' so and so were married according to the 
laws of the State of New York." I do not admit that 
the State law has any jurisdiction over the marriages of 
Catholics. The Church is above the State in that re- 
spect. I cannot, therefore, subscribe to an instrument 
setting forth that people united by me are married in 
accordance with the laws of the State, particularly 
when that is not the case.' " 

Rome gets bolder, day after day, in defying the laws 
of the country ; and why should she not do so when she 
is above all law ? 

We will now consider briefly how Rome acts in regard 



.ira WHAT ROME TEACHES, 

to the temperance question. A few Roman Catholic 
bishops say from time to time that they are in favor of 
the teniperunce movement. They do not say it often, 
or loudly, still Kome does pronounce in a (jua,si oflicial 
manner for the restrict on of the privileges of the saloon- 
keeper. Now why does not Kome speak out on this 
subject ? It is certain if she did so temperiince would 
soon hold the p'ace in this country (of which on occa- 
sions she declares herself to be so proud) which is now 
held by intern i)erance. The fact that Kome as a Church 
tolerates intemperance is sufficient to condemn her in 
every Christian mind. The question is one which ad- 
mits of very easy solution. Kome has the power to put 
down tlie liquor-saloon if slie pleased. She has put 
down the public schools, as far as lier own people are 
concerne<l and she has put down the use of the Bible 
in the public schools as far as the American people are 
concerned. She has also required, and partly sue- 
eieded in securing, that history in the public schools 
shall be taught according to Kome, and not according 
to fact. 

Now it is clear, since she has liad the power to do all 
this, tliat she can do what she pleases with her own 
followers at least, and the liquor-saloon keepers and 
those who are most frequently guilty of intemperance 
are lier own people, with rare exceptions. Why is 
Kome not as anxious to protect them from the con- 
tamination of the liquor-saloon as she is to protect 
them from the contamination of the Bible? This is a 
(juestion whicli the Christian people of this country 
should most certainly consider, and consider very care- 
fully. If they are about to give Kome power in the 
councils of the nation, tln'v would do well to ask. What 



THE TEMPERANCE QUESTION. 253 

has Rome done with the power wliich she already pos 



sesses 



In as far as she has power to govern, what has she 
done for the good of this nation ? In a preceding 
page I have shown that she claims that her officials 
are the only officials who possess permanent power in 
this country. I now proceed to show, not from Prot- 
estant authorities, but from Roman Catholic authority 
of the highest kind, that I have not exaggerated in 
the charge which I have made against Rome. It is 
sad to me to see how Protestants are deceived, and how 
they seem, with a sort of mysterious fear, to try to find 
excuses or apologies for the evils of Rome ; how they 
try to make the most of the least statement which they 
can find in favor of Rome, and utterly ignore the 
tremendous weight of evidence against her. We append 
here the following extract from an article which was 
published in the Catholic World of October, 1890, and 
written by Archbishop Ireland, the well-known Bishop 
of St. Paul, Minn. He says : 

" Let me speak as a Catholic. I know I will be 
blamed for my rashness and credited with unpar- 
donable exaggerations, and, maybe, with untruths. 
There are those who fain would veil from public gaze 
the gaping wounds ; there are those who, limiting their 
observations to their immediate encircling, do not be- 
lieve in the widespread disasters, the knowledge of which 
appalls me. But speak I will, and let me be called, 
as Theobald Mathew was, a fanatic and a madman. 
Intemperance to-day is doing Holy Church harm be- 
yond the power of the pen to describe, and unless we 
crush it out Catholicity can make but slow advance in 
America. I would say, intemperance is our one mis- 
fortune. With all other difficulties we can easily cope, 
and cope successfully. Intemperance, as nothing else, 



2rA WHAT ROMt: TEACHES 

panilyzi^ our forces, ftwakens in tlic minds of our non- 
Cjitholic fellow-oitiziMiH violent projiuliocH against us, 
and casts over all the priceless treasures of truth and 
grace which the Church carries in her bftsom an im- 
])enetrable veil of darkness. Need I particularize? 
Catholics nearly monopolize the liquor traffic ; Catho- 
I'cs loom up before tlie criminal courts of tlie land, 
under the charge of drunkenness and other violations 
of law resulting from drunkenness, in undue majori- 
ties ; poor-houses and a>ylums are thronged with 
Catholics, the immediate or mediate victims of drink ; 
the poverty, the sin, the shame that fill upon our 
people result almost entirely from drink, and, God 
knows, those afflictions come upon them thick and 
heavy ! No one would dare assert, so strong the 
evidence, that, the disgrace from liquor-selling and 
liquor-drinking taken from us, the most hateful enemy 
could not throw a stone at us, or that our people would 
not come out in broad daylight before the country as 
the purest, the most law-abiding, the most honored 
element in its population. And still — mystery pass- 
ing strange ! — the Theobald ^fathews are few, and 
these few are timid." 

In view of the above stiitement, we may well give 
here an extract from the Wine and Spirit Gazette: 

*' The policy of the Roman Catholic Church on the 
liquor question, which is modelled after the principle 
laid down in the gospel of Christ, has been a liberal 
one from times immemorial. It is but lately that the 
spirit of intolerance has taken possession of a certain 
section of the Catholic (liurch of this country. There 
can be no doubt that the doctrine of intolerance put 
forth by the Baltimore Council did not liud a respon- 
sive echo in the bretists of the great mass of Catholics 
in the country. '^ 

In August of the same year I wrote an article on 
the Koman Catholic Church and the liquor question, in 
which I spoke far less severely than this Homan Catholic 



THE TEMPERANCE QUESTION. J>53 

bishop has done, luul yet I was suspected, if I was not 
accused of, exaggeration. I even called attention to 
the contempt with whicli Father Mathew was treated 
while living, and to the neglect which has followed 
his memory since his death. I give here some extracts 
from my own article. It is not the least likely that it 
was seen by Archbishop Ireland : and if it had been 
seen, it is probable that he would have avoided ex- 
pressing him?elf in so similar a manner to myself. 
Hence the remarkable coincidence in it — his Ime of 
argument and mine will add weight to our statements. 

" It IS noteworthy that, with all Home's love of can- 
onization, Father ^lathew, the great, and in fact the 
only apostle of temperance of whom Rome can boast, 
has never been canonized. Rome has reserved the 
highest honors which her Church can give for saints 
who have labored in foreign lands, with more or less 
success ; for saints who have looked well in the eyes of 
the world, because of certain good works which they 
accomplished, not with the help of their Church, but 
actually in spite of the opposition of the Church. 

" Rome has allowed her devoted and long-suffering 
Irish children to become slaves to the curse of drink, 
without one vigorous effort to save them. Rome could 
put an end to the drunkenness in her communion to- 
morrow, if she gave one-half as much attention to the 
subject of the suppression of the liquor traffic as she 
has recently done to the prohibition of the Bible in the 
public schools. Father ]\iathew came, and he did his 
work, not uiththe cordial help of Rome, but in the 
face of secret opposition of the most cruel kind, which 
at last shortened his life and most certainly seriously 
impaired his usefulness. Many of those whom he had 
saved from sin and misery hoped that Rome would at 
least have honored and indorsed his work by raising 
him to the episcopate. But no ; Father Mathew was 
not of the stuff of which bishops were made. How 



e:.« WHAT RO^fK TEACHES. 

ooulil thoy offend the faitlifiil siilooti-keepors, tlic very 
bone and sinew of the Church, the men wlio ni:iko 
mayors for the first city in tlie world, tlio men wlio 
htive a few doUars always ready for the priest and the 
sister? Xo mutter if these dollars were reeking witlj 
the blood of their victims No matter if these dollars 
were the life-blood of the ])Oor. No matter if thest^ 
dollars wer(» the price of immortal souls. They were 
dollars all the same. Kome says she cannot carry on 
her Mastt'r's work without the possession of a tem- 
})oral kingdom, albeit he has said, * My kingdom is 
not of this world." and she li:is certainly always shown 
a very eaorer gri*ed for temporal possession and wealtli. 
** So Father Mathew was in the latter ])art of his life 
left in sad and net:;le('ted obscurity, and even liis mem- 
ory IS but little revered. Could the Church of Kome 
t^ive a greater proof that she is mdilferent to the work 
of temperance ?" 

This coincidence goes to prove that the statements 
which lie lias made and whi li I have made must be true, 
and that Koine as a Church has to answer for the crimes 
and the miseries of drink. One word would stoj) the 
plague. That word will never be spoken, for Rome 
cannot do without the li<[Uor-saloon interest. She 
needs both the money — and it is not unjust to call it 
blood-money — and she needs the po'itical interest of the 
sal<)on-keej)er. And yet of what a crime slie is guilty, 
for she wrecks not only the souls of those who frequent 
the saloon, but she wrecks the eternal welfare of the 
man whose trade slie 8upj)orts because he supports her. 
lioine now and then makes, or permits, a spasmodic 
attempt to honor Father Mathew, but why is he not 
canonized ? Which of lier saints has done so much as 
he did for humanity? He clianged the whole face of 
Irelaml in a few years. Why is it that the prosperity 
did not continue? Because the efforts to keep the 



THE TEMPERANCE QUESTION. 257 

people temperate did not continue. Rome lias declared 
tliat a mortal sin is the most terrible evil which can 
befall any one, Why then does she not give special 
honor to a man who did more to prevent mortal sin 
than any one man who ever lived ? A priest from 
Deland, Florida, says, writing in ihe Roman Catholic 
Baltimore Mirror : 

''Ask what has brought to prisons and almshouse, 
to reformatory and orphanage, to dive and brothel, so 
many children of the Church. Trumpet-tongued comes 
back the answer. Drink — drink." 

Then he asserts, and his statement has never been 
contradicted, that while there are many so-called 
Catholic Temperance Societies, the most of them are 
merely such in name, and that in fact they condone 
the very evils which they are supposed to denounce. 
In proof of this he quotes the following resolution, 
which was twice deliberately voted down in the grand 
Convention of the Catholic Young Men's National 
Union. And yet this Convention was held up to Prot- 
estants as another evidence of the zeal and energy of 
the Roman Catholic Church in the cause of temperance. 
The resolution proposed and rejected was as follows : 

*' That the Catholic Young Men's National Union, 
viewing the saloon as pre-eminently the source of evil to 
young men, will use its utmost influence, and urge 
upon the societies connected with it to use their utmost 
efforts, to prevent Catholic young men from visiting 
saloons, and also to discontinue by all means the drink- 
ing customs of society." 

When a Roman Catholic temperance convention de- 
liberately refused to support such a resolution, the less 
said about Catholic sincerity in the cause of temper- 
ance the better. 



958 W'lfAT ROME TEACHES, 

Archbishop Irelaml says truly: **The Theobald 
Mathews are few, and these few are timid." It is 
little nmrvel that it sliould be so. Bishops and priests 
who drink themselvi'S, and who often drink to excess, 
are not likely to honor men who denounce this crime. 
Hence, as I well know, any priest who attempts to take 
an active part in opposing the liquor-saloon is certain 
to suflfcr for his temerity. Even the archbishop him- 
self has been made to suffer. 

A leading article was published in the Catholic Re- 
vieiv, New York, November 2, 1890, which sharply 
criticised the noble utterances of the archbishop. 
No editor of any Catholic paper dare have taken such 
a step unless he was well assured of the sanction and 
approbation of his ecclesiastical superior. In this 
article of clever and cautious denunciation, we find the 
following, which is well worthy of remark : " Notwith- 
standing the facts put forward by Archbishop Ireland, 
few will consider it desirable that the nations should 
become supporters of his drinking creed." Surely any 
one reading this paragraph would come to the con- 
clusion that the archbishop had been advocating some 
form of intemperance, instead of denouncing it in every 
form. The facts are admitted, but the remedy is not 
to be applied. The evil is admitted, but the cure is 
simply scorned. 

In another part of this same paper the editor gives 
a lecture to the press in general, and declares that 
journalists should act faithfully uiuh'r the orders of 
their bishops, and then they would do '* truly apostol- 
ic work." So it is truly apostolic work to do all that 
18 j)08sible to hindiT the effects of the burning words 
of a bishop who desires to save his people from tlie 



THE TEMPERANCE QUESTION. 2r,ll 

ruin and misery of the drunkard's career I It is perhaps 
worth mention that I spoke of Archbishop Ireland's de- 
votion to the temperance cause in the article from which 
I have quoted above. This article of mine was quoted 
in England by leading journals as the most important 
which has appeared on the subject, and especially by 
Mr. Stead in the Review of Reviews. 
I said : 

^' There have been and are a few like Archbishop 
Ireland who have done their part in the cause of tem- 
perance. Unhappily it can be shown that these few 
have been the noble exceptions to the general rule. 
Their several faihire, and the marked discouragement 
which they have met with, only go to prove what I 
advance here, that Kome is at best indifferent to the 
subject of intemperance. I might say more with per- 
fect truth. I might say that Rome encourages intem- 
perance, for she certainly does when she sets the seal 
of her approval on those who devote their best energies 
to the cause of intemperance. She does not deny 
church membership to drunkards, nor Christian burial 
to those who have been guilty of the most atrocious 
crimes committed urder the influence of drink." 

That drink is the fruitful, if it is n t the exclusive 
cause of crime, there can be no question. Rome Avill 
not suppress, or even modify, as she alone could do, the 
drink traffic ; hence her incompetence to suppress vice 
amongst her people. 



CHAPTER XIII. 

TIIK ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH ON THE RESULTS OF 
HER OWN SYSTEM OP EDUCATION — SOME FACTS 
ABOUT ROMAN CATHOLIC CONTKOL OF THE LIHKRTY 
OF THE rUESS. 

liOMK sometimes, but rarely, admits that she has 
failed utterly as an educator and a reformer. Such 
admissions should be well noted by Christian people, 
not in any spirit of vindictiveness or unchristian tri- 
umpli, but in the spirit of true charity, which desires 
the salvation of the sinner and seeks the best way to 
save that which is in danger of being lost. It is sad 
indeed to see Christian people giving any support to 
the educational schemes of those who are obliged to 
make such admissions as those which have been made by 
Archbishop Ireland and by Father Nugent, whose many 
years' experience of the criminal chisses of the Koman 
Catholic Church entitle his utterances to special re- 
spect. 

We copy the following from the lionuni ( ntholic 
Times, April IT, 1885: 

** The criminal returns of Her Majesty's prison at 
Liverpool for the year ending March 31, 1885, dis- 
close a stiite of things which the Catholic public can- 
not contemplate without feelings of sadness and hu- 
miliation; and it is in the hope that our people may bo 
roused to action ^hat we place the figures before them. 
During the year 21,324 prisoners were committed to 



CATHOLIC EDUCATION. 2C1 

the jail — 12,367 men, and 8,957 women. Of tliis 
number 13,676 were Catholics — 7,237 men, and 6,439 
women ; whilst Protestants and all other denominations 
numbered only 7,648 — 5.137 men, and 2,518 women. 
It would further appear that the daily average of the 
prison population for the year was 633.45 Catholics 
a^e:ainst 327.52 of all other denominations. Thus our 
(Roman CathoUc) people, though forming less than one- 
third of the population of Liverpool, contribute nearly 
one-half to the total number of prisoners." 

The Catholic Times should have said '^ contributed 
more than half the number of prisoners. '^ In fact the 
Eoman Catholic prisoners are nearly double the num- 
ber of the Protestant prisoners. 

This statement is fully confirmed by Father Nugent. 
In his address at Darlington, on October 18, 1886, 
reported in tlie Catholic Times, October 22, 1886, he 
stated that '^ his daily duty during the past twenty-two 
years had been within Her Majesty's prison at Liverpool, 
and it had afforded him daily opportunities of studying 
mankind. That of the prisoners committed to that 
prison last year, 13,676 fell to his charge as Roman 
Catholic Chaplain.^' Again, in his address at the 
League Hall, Liverpool, on Thursday, November 11, 
1886, reported in the Catholic Times, November 12, 
1886, Father Nugent, alluding to the immorality pre- 
vailing in Liverpool, said, '' Nine out of ten of the girls to 
be seen at night along London Road or Lime Street were 
Catholics ; there was no use hiding it. The sisters of 
Notre Dame had 15,000 girls under their charge. 
What became of them after they left school ? They 
went into places where they got work, and instead of 
going home at night, went out with their companions.'' 

Protestants sometimes indulge in sentimental notions 



283 \ynA T R OME TEA CUES. 

about the good done by Catholic priests and sisters. 
Let tho above help to awaken them from their delu- 
sion. Surely a fair consideration of the criminal records 
of even the city of New York, where every Catholic 
has had the lielp of education by sisters, priests and 
brothers, ought to enlighten those who can be enlight- 
ened. I can only sadly add my own testimony to the tes- 
timony of Father Nugent as to the miserable failure of 
Roman Catholic education. Certainly Roman Catholic 
education secures the allegiance to the Church of those 
who are placed under its control, because they are brought 
up to believe that if they doubt or forsake Rome, it is 
at tlie peril of their salvation. But Roman Catholic 
education does not produce the fruit of a virtuous life, 
as the reports of police courts evidence. 

A system of education which is not Christian cannot 
produce Christian results. A system of education 
which does not look to Christ for salvation, and which 
leads the poor soul to look to another Saviour, will 
not have the blessing of God on its efforts. 

Those who are taught to look to Mary for help, will 
not look to God for it, and how can we expect that 
they will get it ? Here is a fair specimen of the kind 
of religion which those 15,000 girls have been taught 
by the Sisters of Notre Dame, and which Father Nu- 
gent is compelled to admit has been such a failure. 
These extracts are taken from the English edition of 
the ** Glories of Mary," approved by Cardinal Manning. 
How many are there who would be amazed and shocked 
to know that he teaches such absurdities? Rut he 
will take care that this part of Rome's teaching will 
not be known except to those who are the victims of 
its folly. 



CATHOLIC EDUCATION. 263 

^'Mary, in order that she might save souls, exposed 
her own to death ; that is, she sacrificed the life of her 
son" (p. 24). 

" We can say of Mary that she so loved us as to give 
her only-begotten son for us. And when did she 
give him ? She gave him when she granted him per- 
mission to deliver himself up to death" (pp. 33, 34), 

But the crowning blasphemy is at page 57, where 
she is called 'Mieaven, where God dwells, and the 
throne from which our Lord dispenses all graces.^' 

'^ A bird was taught to say, 'Hail Mary.' A hawk 
was on the point of seizing it, when the bird cried out 
* Hail Mary/ In an instant the hawk fell dead " (p. 67) . 

A story was told of a devout w^orshipper of Mary 
who died in a lonely place, and in the absence of human 
help, a lion came and xiigged a grave with his claws. 

This reads something like Gulliver's Travels, or the 
Arabian Nights' Entertainment. Were it not for the 
blasphemous character of these stories, they would be 
very entertaining. In a prayer at page 71, a devout 
worshipper of Mary says : 

''I do not fear the devils, for thou art more power- 
ful than the whole of hell. I do not fear thy Son, for 
at a word of thine he will be appeased." 

'^ Before the Divine Word took flesh in the womb of 
Mary, he sent an archangel to ask her consent " (p. 86). 

" If my Redeemer rejects me on account of my sins, 
and drives me from his sacred feet, I will cast myself at 
those of his beloved mother " (p. 90). 

I now turn to the consideration of Rome's control 
of the Press. 

Important matters which deeply concern the highest 
interests of the American people are often overlooked. 
But little attention is paid to newspaper reports, unless 
they concern politics or money. 



364 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

Though the Roman Catholic Church has failed, on 
her own showing, both in this country and in America, 
to control tlu» morals of her people, she none the less 
stoutly claims the ri<^ht to control the press. It is 
necessary for her to do so. If evils were exposed 
Uome's fate would soon be scaled. There must be the 
silence of the grave, but a rule of iron is necessary to 
maintiiin this silence. Here is tlio secret of the won- 
derful unity of Home, at which Protestants so often 
marvel There is no marvel about it. There is noth- 
ing supernatural about it, nor is there anything but 
what is of the earth and earthy. Given a power 
which can make it an offence to be punished, not here 
but liereafter (and here also when possible), to write 
anything which Rome docs not approve, you can easily 
maintain exterior uniformity when you can prevent the 
least expression of adverse opinion. This line of pol- 
icy ends eventually in open rebellion, but such rebell- 
ion luis never made Rome wiser or prevented her from 
holding her captives in chains as long as they will 
bear the chaining. 

"We need facts, especially facts about which there 
cannot bo any dispute. The following is a fact which 
proves on the very highest authority liow Rome acts in 
regard to the " liberty " of the press and the ** liberty '' 
of this country, of which she is so much enamored so 
long as that liberty consists in permitting her to do 
as she pleases and in compelling otliers to obey her rule. 

The following, which is taken from the New York 
Herald oi April 2'ly 1887, is the best reply to give to 
repeated assurances that Rome does not ** interfere" 
in such matters ; that the press is free, and that the 
coinitrv is free. 



CATHOLIC CONTROL OF THE PRESS. 265 

No. 452 Madiso:n" Avenue, ) 

New York, April 14, 1887. j 

To the Editor and Proprietor of the Catholic Herald ; 

Gentlemen : By this note, which is entirely private 
and not to be published. I wish to call your attention 
to the fact that the Third Plenary Council of Balti- 
more, following the leadership of Pope Leo XIII., has 
pointed out the duties of the Catholic press and de- 
nounced the abuses of which journals styling^ themselves 
Catholic are sometimes guilty. *^ That paper alone," 
says the Council (Decree No. 228), 'Ms to be regarded 
as Catholic that is prepared to submit in all things to 
ecclesiastical authority.'' Later on it warns all Catho- 
lic writers against presuming to attack publicly the 
manner in which a bishop rules his diocese, affirming 
that those who so presume, as well as their approvers 
and abettors, are not only guilty of very grievous scan- 
dals but deserve, moreover, to be dealt with by canoni- 
cal censures. 

For some time past the utterances of the GathoUc 
Herald have been shockingly scandalous. As this 
newspaper is published in this diocese, I hereby warn 
you that if you continue in this course of conduct it 
will be at your peril. 

I am, gentlemen, yours truly, 

M. A. CoRRiGAN, ArcliUsliop ofNeiv York. 

You will observe the words '' in all things." Rome 
makes no exception, whether in moral, political, or 
scientific matters. 

The above statement is very clear and deserves atten- 
tion. We have here not merely the opinion of an in- 
dividual bishop, but we have the pronouncement of an 
infallible authority which none may deny, except at the 
peril of salvation. It has been tyrannies such as inter- 
ference with the press, whenever it dared to criticise 
the crimes of bishops or priests or the exactions of 
popes as temporal princes, or even to express a mere 



966 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

opinion contrary to tlie opinion of ecclesiastical ix)wer, 
which eventuated in tlio open revolt against the rule of 
Kome, which has come sooner or later in every Catholic 
country. 

The press must submit *Mn all things" (what a 
clause I ) to ecclesiastical authority, or take the con- 
sequences, and the consequences are both spiritual and 
temporal ruin. Men who might be inclined to risk the 
other world find it is not a very easy matter to submit to 
ruin in this world. Hence the obedience which Rome 
secures. A few Catholics have dared to protest against 
this tyranny from time to time ; but as Protestants, for 
the most part, take the side of Kome either from indif- 
ference or self-interest, Romanists, finding every one 
against tliem, are fain to yield in tlie unequal struggle. 
It is amazing and very sad that Protestants, wlio owe 
their existence to the sacrifices which their forefathers 
made for liberty, should be so very indifferent to the 
liberty of others. One of the above sUitements has 
proved prophetic, for, as we have shown above, the Arch- 
bishop has forbidden the reporters to report the ad- 
dresses of Dr. McGlynn ; and we do not know of what 
public news we are deprived by the subtle and all-per- 
vading influence of Rome. 

A statement such as that which was made by Cardi- 
nal Gibbons in his sermon at Baltimore, March 8, 1891, 
would be taken in England for what it was worth. 
He siiid : ** If it is a great wrong to muzzle the press, 
it is a still greater wrong to muzzle the pulpit. *' We 
have shown, on the equally high authority of Arch- 
bishop Corrigan, that Konio teaches ofiicially that she 
has the right to '* muzzle '' tlie press. 

No wonder that the Roman Catholics of this country 



CATHOLIC CONTROL OF THE PRESS. 267 

are constantly complaining of tlieir literature. I be- 
lieve that if some one would go over the Catholic papers 
of any one week, and the works published by all the 
Catholic publishers of anyone year, and compare them 
with the same class of literature among Protestants, 
the result would be something which could not have 
been anticipated. 

"We give here a statement of the condition of Roman 
Catholic literature, taken from the very number of the 
New York Catliolic Revieiu which so strongly criti- 
cised Archbishop Ireland for his noble pronouncements 
on the temperance question : 

*' Contrast with this happy condition [French liter- 
ature] the press of America and our publishing houses. 
We have not a single daily, but one quarterly, and one 
monthly magazine ; and our best weeklies are but 
primers compared with the French publications. The 
Catholic body takes no interest in its press, will not 
subscribe to it, mostly scorns it, refuses it advertising 
patronage. Many of the leaders can read you argu- 
ments by the page why there should not be a Catholic 
press better than the limping thing we now own. Our 
publishing houses are for the most part helpless affairs, 
about which courtesy compels us to be silent.^' 

So, after years of freedom in this country, the best 
that Rome can say of her own literature is, that it is a 
'limping thing." No w^onder the Catholic public 
'' scorns '*' it. But how could it be otherwise, when it 
is enchained and enslaved by ecclesiastical rule ? 

In the same paper we find the following statement : 

'•' We are in a country whose government we help to 
sustain and guide, and which leaves the Catholic body 
to grow in perfect freedom." 

We have shown above the literary, the moral, and 



968 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

the i>olitical result of tliis state of ^' perfect freetloni.' 
A magazine is published in New York City monthly 
for the exclusive use of tho IJohkih Catholic i)riesty. 
TluMnagazine is called ''Thv Pastor; a monthly journal 
for priests." It need bo Siiid that this journal is au- 
tiiorized by tho highest ecclesiastical authority, and 
that all its decisions are binding on priests. If it 
should bo made a subject of discussion and investiga- 
tion at the weekly conferences of religious bodies in 
New York, they would know a little more about the 
doings of Rome and her teachings, which would be 
much to their advantage. A good many numbers of 
this journal contain translations of the laws of the In- 
quisition in Rome in regard to the publication of books. 
And we may remark that priests must be very poorly 
educated when English translations are made for their 
benefit. There is one advantage in this translation, 
liowever, which the author did i ot intend. The trans- 
lation being authorized, cannot be disputed. 

Here are some of the orders of tho Inquisition as 
regards books ; and it will be seen that while all these 
orders cannot be enforced in this country as yet, be- 
cause the Inquisition has not yet full power, yet it 
has sufficient power to prevent any reflection on or 
ridicule of (even in simple jest) an ecclesiastic. The 
orders of the Inquisition on that point will be seen 
below : 

** Words calculated to injure the good name ot otliers, 
especially that of ecclesiastics and persons in exalted 
stiition, as also all contrary to good morals and Chris- 
tian discipline should be blotted out. 

*' l*roj)ositions (;ontrary to tho liberty, immunity and 
jurisdiction of ecclesijistical persons should bo rejected. 



CATHOLIC CONTROL OF THE PRESS. 209 

'' Also those which — based on tlie sayings, morals and 
doings of heathen communities — advocate tyranny, and 
the introduction of that supremacy of the Stale, so 
irreconcilable with the law of the gospel and Christian- 
ity. 

" Illustrations shall be thrown out which tend to be- 
little or vilify ecclesiastical rites or the rank, office, 
dignity, or persons of religious/' 

" Christian " discipline of course means Roman 
Catholic discipline. Observe that the supremacy of 
the State (the italics are in the original) is irreconcil- 
able with Christianity, according to Rome. Publishers 
should promise under oath to observe, and cause to 
be observed, the laws of the Index. 

" The correctors shall read everything in the book 
from cover to cover. Under the following headings 
will be found what generally needs to be corrected or 
expunged : 

'' Propositions heretical, erroneous, savoring of heresy, 
scandalous, offensive to pious ears, rash, schismatical, 
seditious or blasphemous. 

*^ Those which advocate novelties contrary to the rites 
and ceremonies of the sacraments or contrary to the 
custom and usages of the Holy Roman Church. 

'^ The use of ambiguous novelties of expressions de- 
vised by heretics and intended only to deceive. 

The use of words of dubious or double meaning 
which may leave impressions on the reader's mind not 
in conformity with Catholic truth. 

'^Misquotations of sacred Scripture or quotations 
from the false versions made by heretics — unless in- 
deed these be adduced for the purpose of refuting 
heretics, taking them on their own grounds. 

*' Quotations from the Scriptures irreligiously applied 
to profane subjects should be expunged ; as also those 
which are made to bear a sense different from that al- 
ways given them by the Fathers of the Church and 
by Catholic writers. 



270 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

** Epithets of honor uwd wortls of ])nii8e bestowotl on 
heretics shouKl also bo expunged." 

Sucli is the teucliing of Home, not in tlie dark ages, 
l)Ut in the hist decade of tlie nineteentli century, aiul 
in a country which prides itself on the liberty of the 
press. Konio cannot compel the carrying out of this 
teaching, but she docs so, as we have shown, as far as 
she dare. 

It is amusing to observe the command that no words 
of pmise or honor shall be bestowed on heretics, in view 
of the lavish praises bestowed constantly on Home and 
Uoman Catholic institutions by 'Mieretics." Tliere 
are few Christian papers in this country which do not 
admit lavish praises of Home in their columns fre- 
<|uently, aiul especially lavish praise of Koman Catholic 
methods of working among the poor. 

In the Christian Advocate (Methodist) of Ai)ril 16, 
1891, there is an article by Mr. James Buckham, 
headed '^Teaching the Waifs," from which the follow- 
ing is an extract, and is one of many proofs which 
might be given of the mistaken appreciation which 
Protestants have of the Koman Catholic Church : 

*' But how to reach them — that is the great ques- 
tion. So many of their parents are either Catholics 
themselves, or in sympathy with the Catholic Church, 
that the mere prolTer of religious instruction from 
I'rotestants would bo received with indignation. Yet 
in cases where Protestant churches cannot themselves 
directly reach these children, they can, through indi- 
viiluals. make a statement of specific cases to the 
Catholic priest of the parish, and request the attention 
of tlu! Chun.'h to such. It is not because the Catholic 
Church has not the means to correct these evils, nor 
the disposition to do so, that the children of its mem- 
bers are, so ma/iy of them, allowed to remain in igno- 



CATHOLIC CONTROL OF THE PRESS. 



ise ^ I 



ranee and vice. It is simply because, with its immense 
parishes and manifold religious ceremonies, the Catho- 
lic Church cannot and does not attend as thoroughly ^ 
to its pastoral work as our numerous and subdivided ^ 
Protestant denominations. I have sufficient faith in 
the Catholic Church to believe that, when parochial 
matters of this nature are urged upon its attention, it ^i^ 
is too sincere and earnest in its work to disregard them ^ , 
because they come from Protestant sources. The ^ 
Catholic Church wants to care well for its children, 
and it does care well for them, so far as it can reach 
them. One way. then, to get at our street waifs mor- >i 
ally and religiously, is to bring them under the relig- ^ 
ious instruction of the Church to which most of them '^ 
naturally belong." 

Now the writer of the above is naturally ignorant of 
the working of the Roman Catholic Church, and may 
therefore be excused for taking an entirely wrong view 
of a very important subject, but surely he has every 
opportunity of knowing that the great majority of the 
criminal population of New York are Roman Catho- 
lics, and that the great majority of the criminals have 
been educated in Roman Catholic institutions. 

When Rome had innumerable priests and monks 
and nuns in Rome itself she never pretended to do 
'* pastoral work," in the Protestant sense of the word; 
nor would she do it in New York to-morrow if her 
ecclesiastical force was multiplied by thousands. Rome 
does her work in the confessional. In view of my thirty 
years' experience it must be admitted that I have some 
practical knowledge as to how the Catholic Church 
" cares for her children," and those who desire to 
know what Rome herself says on this subject need only 
read the admissions given in the present work by Roman 
Catholic priests and prelates, as to their utter failure 
to reform those whom they educate. 



279 WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

The oduciition given by the lioinun Catliolic Church 
is not a Christian education ; liencc wo cannot expect 

Christian results. 

The cliilil who is habitually, day after day, taught 
in those institutions, so liighly extolled above, to pniy 
to Mary for salvation and for grace, cannot expect to 
receive the grace of the Holy Ghost. The whole prin- 
ciples and teivchings of the Catholic Church and the 
easy and certain pardon of sins in the confessional 
CDHtinue to make sinning easy, and truly he who runs 
may reiid the result in every Catholic country in the 
world. The more Catholic the country, the less re- 
gard there is for morality or virtue ; crimes of violence 
abound, and religion becomes more and more a super- 
stitious trust in the Virgin Mary and the Church. 
Truly no Christian paper should praise and advocate 
such a system. Yet, as we show above, on the au- 
thority of the Church, while Christians praise Rome 
freely, Komanists are forbidden under the severest pen- 
alties to bestow any *^ words of praise " on Christians ; 
and from long years of perusal of Roman Catholic 
papers and publications, I know how rigidly this rule 
is enforced. 



CHAPTER XIY. 

THE DUTY OF CHRISTIAN PEOPLE. 

The principal object of this work will have been at- 
tained if Christian people are awakened thereby to the 
real character of the Eoman Catholic Church. There 
is a false liberality which barters truth for sentiment, 
and which is undoubtedly one of the great dangers of 
the present day. This liberality is exercised in a man- 
ner which is almost inexplicable in regard to Romanism. 
"We are very far from advocating anything like persecu- 
tion, but persecution is one thing and encouragement 
of false doctrine is quite another. How shall we answer 
to the Master when he comes to ask an account of our 
stewardship, if we have given our assistance, our support, 
our countenance, to a Church which actually denies his 
siilvation ? I was speaking not long since to a gentle- 
man who had passed some time in Mexico, as the 
correspondent of a leading newspaper. He made no 
profession of religion, but he said calmly and with con- 
viction, '•' I do not mean what I say as an irreverence, far 
from it; but I do not know how to express my meaning 
better. In Mexico Christ is a side-show; the saints and 
the Virgin Mary occupy the place of honor. In the 
great Cathedral in Carthegena there is not one image 
of Christ, while it is full of saints and Marys, except m 
the slave-quarters, where there is one crucifix." I know 
the contention of Rome is that the mass is the worship 
of Christ ; but what a worship it is I Is the mass 



274 1 1 'HA r n OME TEACHES. 

Christian woreliip ? Take thu mass at the beet, ami 
what does Komo do in this connection ? She actually 
denii'8 the very roinniaiul of ChriBt given in his dyin^ 
moments, and declares thiit she has a right, as the true 
Church, to alter what Christ has ordered. He has said, 
lis plain as words could say it, ^^ Dri)ik ye all of if.'' 
Tlie very word drink shows that eating could not be 
substituted for drinking, as Home practically teaches 
when she forbids the wine to the laity, and even to 
priests, unless they are saying mass. Tiiis latter point 
is not generally known as it should be. Rome avoids 
the difficulty of contradicting the plain command of 
Christ by siiying that his words, " Drink ye all of it," 
were addressed only to the disciples who are priests. 
But she contradicts herself by her command to the 
priests who assist at mass or receive the siicrament at 
any time without saying mass ; for they too are forbid- 
den to do that which even on the showing of Home, 
Jesus himself has commanded them to do. 

The question is, as we have already siiid. Is liome a 
Christian Church ? She may call herself such, but 
names are not evidence of fact. Can a Church be 
called a Christian Church which forbids the free circu- 
lation of the Christian Bible, and even at the present 
day imprisons those who attempt to read God's word 
for themselves ? Can Kome be a Christian Church when 
she plainly and in her authoritative statements places 
Mary in the place of Christ and calls her a Saviour.^ 
When she teaches her people to say to Mary, '* be my 
salvation ? " 

What then is the duty of Christian people? Is it to 
be afraid to testify for Christ against Kome ? Yet are 
there not thousands to-dav who are so far from testify- 



DUTY OF CHRISTIAN PEOPLE. 27r) 

ing for Christ that they are afraid to say a word in 
condemnation of a Church which is not afraid to con- 
demn tliem? Home antagonizes you. Home teaches 
that there is not the least liope for the salvation of any 
Protestant. Even the supposed plea of '* invincible 
ignorance " has been denounced in the catechism author- 
ized by Cardinal Gibbons. The words, as given else- 
where in this book, are as plain as words can be. And 
yet Christian people speak with bated breath, and 
are afraid to be called illiberal if they say a word for 
Christ ! 

What will be the result of all this ? What will 
be the result of this denial of Christ by Christian 
people? Will not God judge for these things ? How 
can we expect to escape condemnation, when we have 
the light and will not allow others to have it also ? 
What are you doing to enable Eomanists who are in 
darkness to come to Christ ? Perhaps you are even 
preventing them from coming to him. What an awful 
condemnation there will be for those who, having the 
light, fail to enable others to have it also. We must 
spread the light and stand for the truth. 

And the serious part of the matter is that to-day 
there is a stir in the Church of Rome, and an uncon- 
sious craving for light. You are afraid to antagonize 
Rome. You are afraid to say a word for Christ, while 
these people are craving for that word, while they are 
marvelling at your silence, and scandalized by it. If 
you wish to christianize the Church of Rome, how can 
you do so while you are afraid to say a word in opposi- 
tion to its errors ? If you believe that the holy Script- 
ures are necessary to salvation, what are you doing to 
circulate the Scriptures amongst those who can only 



27« WHAT ROME TEACHES. 

obtain them through your elTorts? You are not afraid 
to oflfer tlio Bible to the Cliinese ; you are not afraid 
to oHer tho Bible to the Jews ; why, then, are you 
afraid to press tho reading of Scripture on the Ro- 
manist ? Is it because the Chinese and the Jew cannot 
oppose your efforts; because you will not suffer any social 
reproach if you evangelize them ? Are you then so 
ashamed of Christ, or so afraid of man, that you will 
not work for those who are in worse than heathen 
darkness ? 

Think of these things. You cannot cast your re- 
s})onsibilities from you. If Borne is not on the side of 
Christ ; if you know that the more power Borne has the 
less her people are allowed to know of Christ, why do 
you not try to prevent the growth of her power? Why 
do you help to support her and inereiise her power? 

The heathen are at your door. The men and 
women and children who may not read God's word, 
who must worship Mary and believe in the infallibility 
of sinful man, are waiting for you to deliver them. If 
tliey were at a distance you would be aroused to lielp 
them ; why will you not help them, when they are at 
your door ? Does the fact that they are near you, ar.d 
perhaps related to yon, lessen your responsibility ? The 
McAll Mission may be very interesting reading for the 
Christian people of America ; but if the McAll Mission 
is good for France, why is tliere not a mission of a 
similar character for this country ? You show but very 
little love for Cod when you are zealous for the heathen 
abroad and indifferent to the heathen at liome. If it 
is good to convert the Boman Catholic in France, why 
is it not equally good to convert the Roman Catholic in 
America ? 



APPENDIX. 



NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CHURCH OF ROME. 

In his Encyclical Letters, dated December 8, 1849 ; 
December 8, 1864 ; and August 10, 1863, and in his Allocu- 
tion on December 9, 1854, Pope Pius IX. says ; 

"It is not without sorrow that we have learned another 
not less pernicious error, which has been spread in several 
parts of Catholic countries, and has been imbibed by many 
Catholics, icho are of opinion that all those who are not at 
all members of the true Church of Christ can he saved. 
Hence they often discuss the question concerning the future 
fate and condition of those who die without having professed 
the Catholic faith, and give the most frivolous reasons in 
support of their wicked opinion. . . . It is indeed of 
faith, that no one can be saved outside the Apostolic Roman 
Church ; that this Church is the one ark of salvation ; that 
he whc has not entered it will perish in the deluge. . . . 

" We therefore must mention and condemn again that 
most pernicious error which has been imbibed by certain 
Catholics, who are of opinion that those people who live in 
error and have not the true faith, and are separated from 
Catholic unity, may obtain life everlasting." 

The above translation is taken from the New York 
Catholic Review, 

II. 

THE EVIL OF INDULGENCES. 

Dr. Hirscher, Professor of Theology in the Roman Catho- 
lic University of Freiburg, says : 

'* A further practical and deeply-seated evil, to which the 
attention of the Church must be directed, is the idea entei'- 



278 APPENDIX. 

tninod by tho popular mind conoeruinff inchilpences. Sun 
what you will, there it remains: the ixMiph' understand l»y 
intlui^ences tho remission of sins. Explain to them that 
not the sins, hut only the jwnalties of sin, are affected by 
indui^'enres ; very well, it is the penalty, and not the ^uilt 
of sin. which the people re^'-ard as the iinportiint thinjj ; 
and whatever frees them from the punishment of sin, frees 
them, so far as they care about it, from the sm itself." 

III. 

ROMAN CATHOLIC OPINION OF rUOTESTANTS. 

We hear SO frequently from Roman Catholics that it is 
unjust to them when Protestants enter into controversy, 
either in public or private, on the Roman Catholic question, 
that it IS well to see how Roman Catholics act in this matter 
themselves. Here is another example of what the Roman 
Catholic Church teaches to children. 

Surel}' if such distortions of history are to be taught by 
the authority (»f Cardinal Gibbons, the Pope, and the Roman 
Injpiisition, Protestants should not be blamed by Romanists 
if they defend their relijjrion, and ask a hearing' from the 
public in self-defence. 

It is most dangerous to the cause of truth when Protes- 
tants keep silence on the Roman Catholic controversy, on 
the plea of not antagonizing Rome, while Rome is all the 
time antagonizing them. Day after day, in every school 
under the control of the Church of Rome, the catechism is 
taught with the tiuestionsand answei"s given below. If Prot- 
estants may be thus attacked, why may not they reply to 
sue h attacks ; and why should they not reply in public, since 
these attacks are made in public? 

The Jesuitical cunning of Rome must be met by Christian 
people with the holy wisdom of divine grace. To oppose 
error is a sacred and Christian duty. It is not because they 
wish to "stir up strife" that Christian people condemn 
error ; and we must not expcnt that those who are preaching 
error will allow truth to be told, if they can prevent the 
telling of it. In the catechism from whic h we have quoted 
in the present work we liiul the following (juestions and 



WHAT ROME TEACHES. 279 

answers, which every Roman Catholic child is obliged to 
learn, and of course to believe to be truthful statements : 

** Q. Who caused so many bad Catholics to fall away from 
the Catholic faith? 

"A. 1. Martin Luther, a bad priest in Germany ; he was 
the founder of the German Lutlierans. 

"3. Henry the Vlllth, a wicked Catholic king of England ; 
he was the founder of the Episcopalians. 

"3. John Calvin, a wicked Catholic in France ; he was the 
founder of the Calvinists. 

" 4, Joiui Knox, a bad Catholic priest in Scotland ; he was 
the founder of the Presbyterians, or Puritans. 

'* Q. What do Protestants believe? 

*' A. Protestants believe whatever they choose to believe, 
and therefore we see so many kinds of Protestants." 

Protestants often wonder why it is so difficult to convert 
a Catholic. If they will realize that Catholics are taught 
all this from the earliest dawn of reason, they need not be 
surprised. 

Early impressions of so utterly false a character are not 
easy to remove. But why do not Protestants try and re- 
move them by every means in their power? And if Rome is 
allowed to express and teach such things, why is it to be 
called uncharitable when Protestants combat these false 
statements, either in public or private ? 



IV. 

THE CHURCH AND THE BIBLE. 

The fact that the Roman Catholic Church forbids and dis- 
courages the circulation of the Bible is often denied, renders 
the following Roman Catholic evidence important. M. 
Lasserre in his preface to his Edition de luxe of the Bible, 
writes: *'The greater part of the children of the Church 
know the divine Book only by the fragments contained in 
the prayer-book ; " and he adds his belief that it is no 
exaggeration to say that there are not three believers in 
each parish who have tried to study the Gospels. *'The 
Gospel — the most illustrious book in the world— is become 
an unknown book," 



S80 APPENDIX. 

In .s]K?aking of Roman Catholic books of devotion, he says : 

•'Some of these books are excellent, but this is the excep- 
tion. In the niajoritv of these works, in which, alas! the 
sug-ar of devotion replaces the salt of wisdom, the eternal 
verities and true teaching of the gospel become quickly 
diluted, and lost in strange waters, si)ecial and party doc- 
trines, ascetic or mystic considerations, rules of piety, 
methods, means, processes of perfection, and all sorts of 
prayers. Many of them are enervating by their intellectual 
manity, by their narrowness of conception, by their false 
ideas, or their absence of ideas, by their absolute ignorance 
— ignorance of the real world, ignorance of the human lieart, 
ignorance of tlie true ways of God. But all together, the 
best as well as the most lamentable, are something else;3'es, 
absolutely something else than the Gospel, whose apostolic 
mission they have noiselessly usurped." 

He quotes also from a letter of the Archbishop of Albi, 
Monseigneur Fonteneau : 

*• In vain shall I try to tell you with what joy I have read 
this new and true French translation. I have been pained 
for a long time to see that the Book above all others, the 
Book which is found everywhere, and is quoted every day, 
the Book which God has placed in the foundations of the 
Church, the gospel, is in reality scarce ever read by those 
who profess to be fervent Catholics, and that it is never 
read by the multitude of the faithful. From this day I feel 
certiiin the Gospel will be read, thanks to you and the pro- 
tection of the Inmiaculate Virgin ! I say thanks to you, sir, 
for your translation is most charming and attractive. For 
many it will he a revelation of the gospel. Following in 
your train tliis divine and enchanting history, I am con- 
stantly recurring to the words of the Saviour, which I have 
never before so well comprehended: 'They are spirit and 
life, the words which I have spoken unto you.' " 

The Lasserre Bible was called in by the Inquisition, not- 
withstanding all the approbation given to it by liberal 
bishops, and its circulation is forbidden. 



WORKS BY ARTHUR T, PIBRSON. 



THE CRISIS OF MISSIONS; 

Or, THE VOICE OUT OF THE CLOUD. 
i6mo, paper, 35 cents; cloth, $1.25, 

" One of the most important books to the Cause of Foreign Missions, and, through 
them, to Home Missions also, which ever has been written. It should be in every 
Ubrary and every household. It should be read, studied, taken to heart, and prayed 
over." — Congregatiov.alist . 

" \Vc do not hesitate to say that this book is the most purposeful, earnest, and in- 
telligent review of the mission work and field which has ever been given to the 
church ." — Ch ristia n States mu n . 

EVANGELISTIC WORK IN PRINCIPLE AND PRACTICE. 

i6mo, paper, 35 cents; cloth, $1.25. 

" If our pen could become as fervent as fire, and as fluent as the wave, we could 
not write either too warmly or too well of this book. Dr. Pierson has given us a real 
book— a thunderbolt— a cataract of fire. These flame-flakes ought to fall in showers 
all over Christendom, and set every house on fire." — C. H. Spurgeon. 

" The book tingles with the evangelistic spirit, and is full of arousement without 
sliding into fanaticism." — Springfield Republican. 

" .A stirring trumpet blast to every earnest soul it reaches." — Christian at Work. 

" Every page is filled with the evangelistic spirit Dr. Pierson is full 

of facts, arguments, mcidents, illustrations, and pours them over his pages in a molten 
stream." — N, Y. Evangelist. 

THE ONE GOSPEL; 

Or, THE COMBINATION OF THE NARRATIVES OF THE FOUR 
EVANGELISTS IN ONE COMPLETE RECORD. 

Edited by Rev, Arthur T. Pierson, I). D. i2mo, flexible cloth, red 
edges, 75 cents; limp morocco, full gilt, $2.00. 

Without taking the place of the four Gospels this book will be an aid in their 
study — a commentary wholly Biblical, whereby the reader may, at one view, see the 
complete and harmonious testimony of four independent witnesses. 

" Dr. Pierson has done his work with excellent judgment and fidelity to the spirit 
and letter of the evangelists." — Christian Union. 

■' To ministers, Sunday-school teachers, and all Bible students it is of great value, 
presenting, as it does, the gospel story without break, and the events in chronological 
order." — Presbyteria n Observer. 



The above books sent, postpaid, on receipt of the price, 
by the publishers, 

THE BAKKR & TAYLOR CO., 

740 AND 742 BROADWAY, NEW YORK. 



A NEW BOOK BY DK. CUYLHK. 



HOW TO BE A PASTOR 

BY THbOl-iOKt L. CUYLbK, Lj. U. 



16mo. Gilt Top, 75 Cents. 



CONTENTS. 

I.— Importance of Pastoral Labor. II. -Pastoral Visits. 
III.— Visitation OF THK Sick Funkral Skrvicks. IV. Treat- 
ment OF THE TroI HLED. V. — HoW To HaVE A WORKING ChURCM. 

VI.— Traimnc; Converts. VII. -Prayer- Meetings. VIII.— A 
Model Prayer - .Meeting. IX. — Revivals. X.— Drawlng the 
Bow AT A Venture. XI —Where to be a Pastor. XII.— Joys 
OF the Christian Ministry. 

•* It is not evcrvone who has wisdom and opportunity, at the close 
of a long career ol usefulness, so to tike ai count of the results of his 
work as to bring to light the secrets of his success, and to present them 
in concrete form to tlio^-e who shall conic after him. This Dr. Cuyler 
has been able to do. In the little l)ook U fore us we have the key to 
the pastor's triumphs over the ditTu ultics and problems of a forty years' 
pastorate -a n)asterkey indeed, which will fit ihc wards of many a 
young pastor's perplexities, and open for him the door into a l.irge 
freedom in that dealing with the human htart which is his important 
work. " — Evangelist. 

"The fruit of large native sense, long experience, wide observa- 
tion, and devout consecration," — CoitgregatiotMlist. 

**If any man living understands the subject of ihis little book it is 
Dr. Cuyler. He writes briefly and to the point."- Indrpntdntt. 

** Ought to be read by all pastors, young and old. Dr. Cuyler has 
lx:t:n, himself, almost an ideal i>astor.'" — .W Y. Tribum. 



Sent, postpaid, upon receipt of price, by 

THE BAKER & TAYLOR CO 

PUBLISHERS, 

740 and 742 Broadway, New York. 



T H IZ 

GREAT VALUE AND SUCCESS 

OF FOREIGN MISSIONS. 

PROVED BY DISIINGUISHED WITNESSES. 



By Rev. JOHN LIGGINS. 

Wiih an Introduction by Rc-v. ARTHUR T. PIERSON, D.D. 

12mo, 249 pages. Paper, 35c. ; cloth, 75c. 



A POWERFUL presentation of overwhelming evidence, mainly from 
independent sources, and largely that of Diplomatic Ministers, Viceroys, 
Governors, Military and Naval Officers, Consuls, scientific and other 
Travellers in Heathen and Mohammedan countries, and in India and 
the British Colonies. The book also contains leading facts and late 
statistics of the missions. 

" The best answer which could be given to recent as well as former attacks on 
foreign missionary work. A grand service has been done to the cause of Christian 
missions, and I am sure the book will accomplish a vast amount of good." — Rev. 
S. L. Baldtuin, D D., Secretary of the Methodist Missionary Society. 

" The author has performed a service of infinite value. His book will be a 
revelation to many and an inspiration to all " — Rev. A. Sutherland, D. D., in the 
Missionary Outlook. 

" By far the most remarkable book on foreign missions yet published " — The 
Church of To- Day. 

" I have been profoundly interested. It is one of the most graphic stories I have 
ever read" — Bishop Whipple. 

" It is a settler. Send out the book as on the wings of the winds." — Rer 
Theodore L. Cnyler, D. D. 

"A royal book. A mighty massing of testimony." — /^^z/. A. T. Pierson, D. D 

" The book will be found of immense value." — JVctv York Observer. 

"A triumphant demonstration of the success of missions." — Canadian Methodist 
Magazine. 

"An admirable work, and pre-eminently timely " — Bishop Potter, 



Sent, post-paid, OJt receipt of price, by 

THE BAKER k TAYLOR CO., Publishers, 

740 and 742 Broadway, New York. 



/ liOh'K OF rROhOUXl) IXTKREST TO THE 
CHRISTIAN WORLD! 



SOCIALISM AND 

CHRISTIANITY. 

By A. J. F. BEHRENDS, D.D. 
12 MO. F*A.paR, 60 CBNT3. Cloth, $1.00 



This book treats from a new point of view the problems raised by the most 
frequently advanced social theories of the day ; their relations to the reciprocal 
di.tics of Labor and Capital, and the jMjsition of the Christian Church with 
reference to the social and industrial movements that are taking place about it 

CONTENTS: 

I. Social Theories. II. Historical Sketch. III. The Assumptions of 
Modem Socialism. IV. The Economic Fallacies of Modem Socialism. 
V. Ti)e Rights of Labor. VI. The Responsibilities of Wealth. VII. The 
Personal and Scxrial Causes of Pauperism. VI II. The Historical Causes 
of Pauperism and its Cure. IX. The Treatment of the Criminal Classes. 
X. Modem Socialism, Religion, and the F.-imily. 

"It is a book for the times in the interest of truth and justice and pure religion 
Wc have read it from beginning to end with unfl.igging interest, and shall read it a 
«econd time thi> summer, and hope to l.iy some extracts before our readers." — i\Vw 
) \yrk Ohsertfr. 

" It is the fimt approach to a popular systematic presentation of the principles of 
.he destructive »«>cialism of the d.iy. The questions which it discusses are now so 
promin«i)t, and their soci.il bearing is so vital, that ministers should deal with them. 
Wc commend this volume to them, especially to all who desire to get an intelligent 
riew of one of the burning questions of the day." — PreshyteriaH Journal. 

"The bot.k should be in every home; and wc are sure that if the principles which 
ii advocates and the information which it presents were given to every family in tht 
Uod, the present di!«turbances in our country would soon be at an end." — St. Louu 
f ytral BaftUt. 



Stntf post-paid, on receipt of price, by 

THE BAKER & TAYLOR CO., Publishers, 

7 H» ntitl 7 14 l»r«wdw«), \e»v York. 



EVANGELISTIC WORK 

In Principle and Practice. 

By Rev. Arthur T. Pierson, D.D 
ISmo, Cloth, $1.25. 



A new book on that method which has been one of the most 
potent means of building up the Christian Church — Evangelization. 
It is written by an acknowledged master of the subject. 

" This book is preeminently a book for the hour. It is at once 
a fruit of the reviving evangelistic spirit and a welcome and powerful 
force for the promotion of that spirit among the disciples of Christ. 
All who are working for Christ, especially all ministers and teachers, 
ought to procure and study this book." — Christian Statesman. 

" More truth, perhaps, than can be found in any single uninspired 
book, concerning ' evangelistic work,' is included in a volume with 
this title, by Arthur T. Pierson, D.D. Truths of the first importance 
are spoken concerning methods and the treatment of the poor. After 
having set down the principle as he believes it to be, the author has 
enforced it in sketches of Whitefield, Howard, Finney, Chalmers, 
Moody, Bliss, and others. The book o'lght to have a wide circulation ; 
it cannot but be productive of the greatest good." — Hartford Post. 

" Every phase of the question is discussed, the methods and 
merits of different evangelists are set forth, apostolic and modern 
preaching compared, and the causes of failure and success in minis- 
terial work portrayed. It is a book to be studied by all church 
workers. " — Indianapolis Journal. 

" The book is dedicated to Dwight L. Moody, and would seem 
to contain nearly all that can be said in the way of information, 
instruction, example, or exhortation upon the subject." 

— Baptist Standard. 

" The chapters on the great Evangelists are delightfully written 
in a lofty and devout spirit." — Indianapolis News. 

" His views will be accepted as of orthodox authority." 

— Washington Critic. 

Senty postpaid^ on receipt of the price ^ by 

THE BAKER & TAYLOR CO., 

Publishers, 

740 AND 742 BROADWAY, NEW YORK. 



A Great Book on a Great Subject. 



THE CRISIS OF MISSIONS; 

Or, the Voice out of the Cloud. 

I'.V IHK 

REY. ARTHUR T. PIERSON, D. D. 
Paper, 36c. Cloth, $1.25. 



" One of the most important books to the Cause of Forei^ni Missions — 
a.nd through them to Home Missions also -which ever has been written. 
It should Ijc in every library and every household. It should be read, 
studied, taken to heart, and prayed ovi^r.^^—Conp-egationalist. 

'•Surely if the inspiration and the force of this 'Crisis of Missions' 
were imbibed and felt by the whole sacramental host, there would be a 
mighty uprising, a grand anointing, and a holy crusade to storm the 
kingdom of darkness all along the line, and speedily add the crown of 
earth to Christ's many crowns V^— Homilftical Ktri'icw. 

" This is a lxx)k for every Christian to read with prayer and a sin- 
cere desire to know his personal duty in this great and glorious work." — 
X. Y. Obser-jcr. 

••We do not hesitate to say that this l)Ook is the most purposeful, 
earnest and intelligent review of the mission work and held which has ever 
been given to the church."— Christian Statesman. 

"A closely compacted array of facts, arranged under distinct heads 
and welded together by the strong rivets of logic, vivified and made almost 
a thing of life by the evident presence throughout its pages of the guiding 
power of the Holy Ghost,"— /'/^^/ /'rz'. //>/;. Bacon Stri'cns, Btihop of 
rcnnsylvania . 



Sent, post-pSLid on receipt of price^ by 

THE BAKER & TAYLOR CO., 

PUBLISHERS, 
140 AND 74? imOADWAY, NEW TORH. 



MODERN CITIES 

AND 

THEIR RELIGIOUS PROBLEMS 

By Rev. SAMUEL LANE LOOMIS. 

WITH AN INTRODUCTION 

By Rev. JOSIAH STRONG, D.D. 
l2mo. Cloth. $i.oo. 



An important work, treating the growth of the City, 
the composition of its population, and the peculiar diffi- 
culties it offers to religious workers ; giving an instructive 
account of the methods employed by the most successful 
evangelists at home and abroad, and practically applying 
them to the work of our city churches. It is an extremely 
useful study of the foremost problem of the times. 

" This volume not only points out the necessity and magnitude 
and difficulty of the work to be done in our cities, but abounds in 
valuable suggestions touching methods of work .... In the 
work of city evangelization we have much to learn from the Christian 
workers of London and the McAU Mission in Paris. This book en- 
ables us to profit by their experience and success, .... and 
the sooner our churches accept the conclusions of this book and act on 
its valuable recommendations, the sooner will the ' threat of the 
cities' cease." — Dr. Josiah Strong in the Introduction. 



SENT POSTPAID, ON RECEIPT OF PRICE, BY 

THE BAKER & TAYLOR CO., 

F*i_iblislners, 
740 AND 742 BROADWAY, NEW YORK. 



WORKS BY M. F. CUSACK 

( THE NUN OF KEN MA RE). 



WHAT ROME TEACHES 

1 2mo, cloth, $1.25. 

Since the author's conversion to Protestantism, she has observed with 
regret how lew Protestants are really well informed as to the actual teach- 
ings of Catholicism, and its attitude toward politics and the press. This 
has led her to prepare this book with the view of giving information where 
it Is needed and will be of value. Her intimate knowledge of Catholic doc- 
trine and instruction, her long experience in Romanist work and association 
with Romanist workers, and her command of a vigorous style, admirably fit 
her to prepare a work of value and interest. 

THE NUN OF KENMARE, 
An autobiography. Crown octavo, cloth, 540 pages, with por- 
trait, $1.50. 

•* By her pen she has made her name famous, and some of her works 
will live as monuments of her industry and her accuracy of research. We 
trust that Miss Cusack, being now freed from the shackles of her late bond- 
age, will see her way to some sphere of labor that shall be more beneficial 
to herself and helpful to the cause of ' pure religion and undefiled before 
God and the Father.' ^'—Tke Churchman, New York. 

'* We sincerely hope that Sister Clare may go forward to do as grand a 
work for the American Church in her declinint; years, as she did for the 
Roman Church in Ireland, when in her youth she attained to world-wide 
fame as the ' Nun of Kenmare,' as an author, and as a benefactor of the 
poor." — The Living Church, Chicago. 

LIFE INSIDE THE CHURCH OF ROME. 

Crown octavo, 410 pages, $1.75. 

" It was expected that Miss Cusack would have something unusual to 
tell the public, and now that the book has at length seen the light, it is 
satisfactory to add that their expectations will not be disappointed. Miss 
Cusack has a great deal to reveal, and she speaks with no hesitating sound.*' 
— The Churchman, London, England. 

'* It is surprising to see what a keen insight Miss Cusack has into the 
whole Romish system, political, social and literar>'."— TA/ Rock, Ix>ndoa, 
England. 

*»• Tlu above books sent, postpaid, on receipt of the price by 

THE BAKER cS: TAYLOR CO., 

740 & 742 Broadway, New York, 







■ y. ^ Prefer vationTechnologies 

^f^^ cmo^iy To-«Np. PA leoes 

Vj| (724) TTMin 



I IBf^AI^Y OF CONGRESS 



00173190530 # 



